Nevertheless, Corbyn is saying that Labour will vote for the Withdrawal Agreement in return for declarations of intent, which by their nature can't bind the actions of any future government. In view of that, why not at least try to see if a form of words can be agreed on, including a statement of that obvious fact, which would allow the Withdrawal Agreement to pass?
How can I put this?
If Corbyn agrees to whip Labour to support BRexit, he will face rebellions;
If he whips Labour to support Brexit for a politically worthless declaration, he will cause a formal split in his party;
If he supports the WA and then the ultimate agreement is a diamond hard Brexit that even Rees-Mogg says goes too far - which could happen, although it doesn't seem likely - Labour itself is wrecked past all hope of recovery and will have the influence of the Liberals under Sinclair and Davies;
If, on the other hand, he can force a no deal Brexit by indecision and dithering there is a reasonable chance of sweeping to power with a mandate to totally wreck, er, reshape the British economic and social system. All he has to do is make a few soothing noises about how sad he is.
Therefore - why would he take the course you outline right now?
Answer - he wouldn't. Because even Mr Flunked a Poly Course Inside A Week Corbyn ain't that thick.
Therefore, any suggestions to the contrary are just posturing and can be ignored.
That's not to say what's happening right now is good, but if he is to let the WA pass he would have to have some sort of legally binding commitment on what TM will seek as the outcome.
He's said exactly what kind of commitment he wants. It's in his letter. And of course, the government can't bind the actions of future governments. That's fundamental.
But if it's so obvious that Corbyn doesn't mean what he's said, why not call his bluff? Because you can be sure that if the offer's just ignored, and if things go badly wrong, then you can be sure the Tories will never hear the last of the fact that May simply ignored a Labour proposal that even the EU told her was a promising way out of the difficulty.
I for one had never come across Nico Henderson's analysis - what remarkable insight it shows.
I fear we may be about to enter a period of significant decline as we cut ourselves adrift from Europe once again.
I do wonder how the other 94% of the planet not tied to the EU manage to survive and thrive given that apparently it is impossible to exist as a civilisation without EU membership.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership. This is a classic case of salami slicing. They take the Single Market membership and then point out that to have an open border we must accept Single Market membership as well.
? I don't think you need either, you just need an FTA with Ireland, right?
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
You couldn't make it up could you? It's difficult to see the point of Brexit now. I mean, to me and most economic literates it always was difficult but now even all but the most knee jerking little Englanders must be able to see it.
1. Who is ever going to trust us? We want everyone to treat us fairly but are quite happy to break our obligations. 2. We are seen to be effectively abandoning UK citizens living abroad. 3. We expect everyone to give us most-favoured nation terms when the reality is that the few people who don't actively dislike us are seeking the very best terms they can squeeze out of us. 4. We have broken promises to foreign investors and partners.
I'm reminded of the decision of 17th Century Japan to cut themselves off from the world for two hundred years. Perhaps that's it? 200 years of self-inflicted isolation. A fitting end to a once great nation that prided itself on it's internationalism and prided itself in it's contribution to the world.
May's can kicking was vaguely amusing at the start but is now actively dangerous. If ever there was a time for the fabled men in grey suits to prise her fingers from the doors of No 10 this is it. ...
Or perhaps the fabled men in white coats.
It is understandable to have a go at TM but is this another example of knowing what you are against rather knowing a way out of this mess
I'm sure we can all think of several reasonable ways out of the mess. The difficulty is the dysfunctional state of the Tory party, and the attitude that the first priority is to humour the Tory party rather than acting in the country's best interests.
Just as a matter of interest what is your way out that would receive majority support to pass the HOC
The Corbyn Customs Union plan would pass if May endorsed it, and DUP as well as SNP would support too, as would the EU.
1. Who is ever going to trust us? We want everyone to treat us fairly but are quite happy to break our obligations. 2. We are seen to be effectively abandoning UK citizens living abroad. 3. We expect everyone to give us most-favoured nation terms when the reality is that the few people who don't actively dislike us are seeking the very best terms they can squeeze out of us. 4. We have broken promises to foreign investors and partners.
I'm reminded of the decision of 17th Century Japan to cut themselves off from the world for two hundred years. Perhaps that's it? 200 years of self-inflicted isolation. A fitting end to a once great nation that prided itself on it's internationalism and prided itself in it's contribution to the world.
May's can kicking..
Or perhaps the fabled men in white coats.
It is understandable to have a go at TM but is this another example of knowing what you are against rather knowing a way out of this mess
#CorbynsCustomsUnionitsstaringyouinthface
Not a chance. It is staying in all but name with no control of immigration, taking rules and paying in
Corbyn's game is a nonsense and if he believes in a Norway deal he would be better backing a referendum and stopping brexit
The EU ap
a) The EU are happy with this b) There is a majority in Parliament for it
May is bonkers for not jumping at the one way out of her own shambles.
They will not break their four freedoms and the EU have not said they will.
And most of the conservative party and upto 60 labour mps from leave areas would be against.
The whole idea is pointless and Corbyn only suggested it knowing it will not be accepted. He doesn't want it himself, his ideal brexit is no deal
In what way would it be breaking the 4 freedoms?
Norway requires free movement of people
Maybe I'm behind, but I thought Corbyn was just suggesting CU, and then some vaguer language on the SM. Or has he fully come out for Norway now?
Labour are promoting Norway plus and it will not resolve the issues. Rule taker, freedom of movement, and paying in. In that scenario I would vote to revoke A50
Thanks @Cyclefree for a thoughtful header. I was particularly struck by this passage in the Henderson Dispatch, which I don't previously recall reading.
Top paragraph page 5: "In any case the UK has a large population accustomed to and skilled in industrial life, who within the confines of the British Isles, would suffer a large drop in standards were they to become the pioneers of of a de-industrial revolution."
Some of the issues in the Despatch are obselete, but this strikes me as very prescient. Henderson was a favourite of Maggie, but she must have skipped this bit. Overall the economy has become better, but in new service industries and regions. The rust belts of our coalfields have this in common with Ohio or Picardy. A Brexit that fails to meet the needs of those people 40 years on, is not going to be a success.
Of course, previous national narratives were not universally supported, whether colonial conquest, or joining the EEC. Indeed they were quite divisive. One of the reasons for British nostalgia for WW2 was that it was a brief period in modern times where the nation was nearly entirely united. For the other 95% of the 20th Century we were pretty much as divided as the present.
Actually the 'rust belts' of some of our former coalfields are doing so well they have started electing Tory MPs - unheard of a couple of decades ago.
And I find it amusing that we have people who in one breath bemoan the fate of our coalfields and in another harp on about decarbonisation of the economy for the good of the planet.
Well, in some ways their economies have improved, for example the old Leics Coalfield around Coalville, but these and our other post industrial regions remain places unhappy with the modern world. Working in the Amazon fulfillment centre in Coalville does not provide the fulfillment or community that the NCB did. Much of the other work is similar low level and unstable service work.
You couldn't make it up could you? It's difficult to see the point of Brexit now. I mean, to me and most economic literates it always was difficult but now even all but the most knee jerking little Englanders must be able to see it.
1. Who is ever going to trust us? We want everyone to treat us fairly but are quite happy to break our obligations. 2. We are seen to be effectively abandoning UK citizens living abroad. 3. We expect everyone to give us most-favoured nation terms when the reality is that the few people who don't actively dislike us are seeking the very best terms they can squeeze out of us. 4. We have broken promises to foreign investors and partners.
I'm reminded of the decision of 17th Century Japan to cut themselves off from the world for two hundred years. Perhaps that's it? 200 years of self-inflicted isolation. A fitting end to a once great nation that prided itself on it's internationalism and prided itself in it's contribution to the world.
May's can kicking was vaguely amusing at the start but is now actively dangerous. If ever there was a time for the fabled men in grey suits to prise her fingers from the doors of No 10 this is it. ...
Or perhaps the fabled men in white coats.
It is understandable to have a go at TM but is this another example of knowing what you are against rather knowing a way out of this mess
I'm sure we can all think of several reasonable ways out of the mess. The difficulty is the dysfunctional state of the Tory party, and the attitude that the first priority is to humour the Tory party rather than acting in the country's best interests.
Just as a matter of interest what is your way out that would receive majority support to pass the HOC
The Corbyn Customs Union plan would pass if May endorsed it, and DUP as well as SNP would support too, as would the EU.
Big G has a blind spot re that.
Party b4 Country I assume
No - it is not leaving and the EU would only agree subject to free movement, rule taking, and paying in
He's said exactly what kind of commitment he wants. It's in his letter. And of course, the government can't bind the actions of future governments. That's fundamental.
But if it's so obvious that Corbyn doesn't mean what he's said, why not call his bluff? Because you can be sure that if the offer's just ignored, and if things go badly wrong, then you can be sure the Tories will never hear the last of the fact that May simply ignored a Labour proposal that even the EU told her was a promising way out of the difficulty.
Has it not occurred to you that might be exactly what he wants? The point is such a commitment is valueless to him and to the unions - which is all he actually cares about - and therefore he cannot be offering it seriously.
Incidentally, here is what Verhofstadt actually said:
"We can't have an agreement with uncertainty in the UK based on majorities of six, seven, eight or nine votes in the House of Commons.
"A cross-party co-operation is the way forward and I think I can say that we welcome also the letter that Jeremy Corbyn has written today to Mrs May to offer such a cross-party exit.
"It's important now that this leads to a position in the UK that has the broadest possible majority, so that we can conclude these negotiations."
That's welcoming the offer to talk, not the specific proposals, although I know Tusk is supposed to be more enthusiastic.
Thanks @Cyclefree for a thoughtful header. I was particularly struck by this passage in the Henderson Dispatch, which I don't previously recall reading.
Top paragraph page 5: "In any case the UK has a large population accustomed to and skilled in industrial life, who within the confines of the British Isles, would suffer a large drop in standards were they to become the pioneers of of a de-industrial revolution."
Some of the issues in the Despatch are obselete, but this strikes me as very prescient. Henderson was a favourite of Maggie, but she must have skipped this bit. Overall the economy has become better, but in new service industries and regions. The rust belts of our coalfields have this in common with Ohio or Picardy. A Brexit that fails to meet the needs of those people 40 years on, is not going to be a success.
Of course, previous national narratives were not universally supported, whether colonial conquest, or joining the EEC. Indeed they were quite divisive. One of the reasons for British nostalgia for WW2 was that it was a brief period in modern times where the nation was nearly entirely united. For the other 95% of the 20th Century we were pretty much as divided as the present.
Actually the 'rust belts' of some of our former coalfields are doing so well they have started electing Tory MPs - unheard of a couple of decades ago.
And I find it amusing that we have people who in one breath bemoan the fate of our coalfields and in another harp on about decarbonisation of the economy for the good of the planet.
Well, in some ways their economies have improved, for example the old Leics Coalfield around Coalville, but these and our other post industrial regions remain places unhappy with the modern world. Working in the Amazon fulfillment centre in Coalville does not provide the fulfillment or community that the NCB did. Much of the other work is similar low level and unstable service work.
and yet you condemn the locals for voting against a system that put them there
I for one had never come across Nico Henderson's analysis - what remarkable insight it shows.
I fear we may be about to enter a period of significant decline as we cut ourselves adrift from Europe once again.
I do wonder how the other 94% of the planet not tied to the EU manage to survive and thrive given that apparently it is impossible to exist as a civilisation without EU membership.
Norway is tied to the EU system and that's what you advocate for us, so you clearly don't believe what you're saying.
I did a talk explaining what the proper use of communications at work should be. One audience member asked me how private their private communications at work were and I replied that they weren't. If it was on work email or on a work computer, there was no guarantee of privacy (though in practice investigators aren't interested in Ocado shopping lists)
The look of shock on the audience's faces was a bit of a surprise to me, I must say.
You know your job is teaching bankers not to be fuckwits?
That anecdote tells me it's a lost cause.
Well, it was quite some time ago. And the number of emails/ chats discussing people's sex lives dropped dramatically thereafter.
But, to be cynical, people still want to be taught even if, in their heart of hearts, they wonder how much people really will change.
And the other part of my job is doing investigations - which is what I've been doing for the last 5 months and very interesting and lucrative it is too.
Thanks @Cyclefree for a thoughtful header. I was particularly struck by this passage in the Henderson Dispatch, which I don't previously recall reading.
Top paragraph page 5: "In any case the UK has a large population accustomed to and skilled in industrial life, who within the confines of the British Isles, would suffer a large drop in standards were they to become the pioneers of of a de-industrial revolution."
Some of the issues in the Despatch are obselete, but this strikes me as very prescient. Henderson was a favourite of Maggie, but she must have skipped this bit. Overall the economy has become better, but in new service industries and regions. The rust belts of our coalfields have this in common with Ohio or Picardy. A Brexit that fails to meet the needs of those people 40 years on, is not going to be a success.
Of course, previous national narratives were not universally supported, whether colonial conquest, or joining the EEC. Indeed they were quite divisive. One of the reasons for British nostalgia for WW2 was that it was a brief period in modern times where the nation was nearly entirely united. For the other 95% of the 20th Century we were pretty much as divided as the present.
Actually the 'rust belts' of some of our former coalfields are doing so well they have started electing Tory MPs - unheard of a couple of decades ago.
And I find it amusing that we have people who in one breath bemoan the fate of our coalfields and in another harp on about decarbonisation of the economy for the good of the planet.
Well, in some ways their economies have improved, for example the old Leics Coalfield around Coalville, but these and our other post industrial regions remain places unhappy with the modern world. Working in the Amazon fulfillment centre in Coalville does not provide the fulfillment or community that the NCB did. Much of the other work is similar low level and unstable service work.
My sympathies are zero. It is a changed world and their old jobs are not needed nor, it seems wanted. And as I said they can't be that unhappy given some of these places are now voting Tory. Not that I am saying that is a good thing, just that the idea they are unhappy with their lot seems removed from the truth.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership. This is a classic case of salami slicing. They take the Single Market membership and then point out that to have an open border we must accept Single Market membership as well.
? I don't think you need either, you just need an FTA with Ireland, right?
Well you need an FTA with the EU not Ireland. But that is not currently on offer and what Corbyn suggests will not solve the issue.
Not a chance. It is staying in all but name with no control of immigration, taking rules and paying in
Corbyn's game is a nonsense and if he believes in a Norway deal he would be better backing a referendum and stopping brexit
The EU appear to be ready to sign up to Labour's proposals which do not include Freedom of Movement. I'm a total broken record on this but if:
a) The EU are happy with this b) There is a majority in Parliament for it
May is bonkers for not jumping at the one way out of her own shambles.
They will not break their four freedoms and the EU have not said they will.
And most of the conservative party and upto 60 labour mps from leave areas would be against.
The whole idea is pointless and Corbyn only suggested it knowing it will not be accepted. He doesn't want it himself, his ideal brexit is no deal
It's all very well saying MPs won't support this or that. But frankly it's the MPs - and particularly the Tory MPs - who have got us into this mess, and they are very rapidly running out of time to indulge themselves in the luxury of being against things without being able to come up with an alternative.
It is each and every one of the 498 mps who voted for A50 with default no deal who are responsible
Do you have a solution that will receive majority support in tbe HOC and is doable
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Yes, I know that. I am English so it’s valid for me to say us. I don’t think or imply everyone is.
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
OK - talk me through this. Both of you naked, both agreeably engaged. Then he/she whips phone out. From where? Their arse?
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
And if they did and you didn't want to be photographed, a sharp kick and pants on pronto should be the response. What kind of narcissist concentrates on filming themselves / you while making love? Yuck - on so many levels.
He's said exactly what kind of commitment he wants. It's in his letter. And of course, the government can't bind the actions of future governments. That's fundamental.
But if it's so obvious that Corbyn doesn't mean what he's said, why not call his bluff? Because you can be sure that if the offer's just ignored, and if things go badly wrong, then you can be sure the Tories will never hear the last of the fact that May simply ignored a Labour proposal that even the EU told her was a promising way out of the difficulty.
Has it not occurred to you that might be exactly what he wants? The point is such a commitment is valueless to him and to the unions - which is all he actually cares about - and therefore he cannot be offering it seriously.
Incidentally, here is what Verhofstadt actually said:
"We can't have an agreement with uncertainty in the UK based on majorities of six, seven, eight or nine votes in the House of Commons.
"A cross-party co-operation is the way forward and I think I can say that we welcome also the letter that Jeremy Corbyn has written today to Mrs May to offer such a cross-party exit.
"It's important now that this leads to a position in the UK that has the broadest possible majority, so that we can conclude these negotiations."
That's welcoming the offer to talk, not the specific proposals, although I know Tusk is supposed to be more enthusiastic.
Well, obviously if you are right when you guess that Corbyn isn't serious, May clearly needs to call his bluff. Ignoring the offer is just going to hand him a propaganda victory on a plate.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
Not a chance. It is staying in all but name with no control of immigration, taking rules and paying in
Corbyn's game is a nonsense and if he believes in a Norway deal he would be better backing a referendum and stopping brexit
The EU
They will not break their four freedoms and the EU have not said they will.
And most of the conservative party and upto 60 labour mps from leave areas would be against.
The whole idea is pointless and Corbyn only suggested it knowing it will not be accepted. He doesn't want it himself, his ideal brexit is no deal
It's all very well saying MPs won't support this or that. But frankly it's the MPs - and particularly the Tory MPs - who have got us into this mess, and they are very rapidly running out of time to indulge themselves in the luxury of being against things without being able to come up with an alternative.
It is each and every one of the 498 mps who voted for A50 with default no deal who are responsible
Do you have a solution that will receive majority support in tbe HOC and is doable
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
You couldn't make it up could you? It's difficult to see the point of Brexit now. I mean, to me and most economic literates it always was difficult but now even all but the most knee jerking little Englanders must be able to see it.
1. Who is ever going to trust us? We want everyone to treat us fairly but are quite happy to break our obligations. 2. We are seen to be effectively abandoning UK citizens living abroad. 3. We expect everyone to give us most-favoured nation terms when the reality is that the few people who don't actively dislike us are seeking the very best terms they can squeeze out of us. 4. We have broken promises to foreign investors and partners.
I'm reminded of the decision of 17th Century Japan to cut themselves off from the world for two hundred years. Perhaps that's it? 200 years of self-inflicted isolation. A fitting end to a once great nation that prided itself on it's internationalism and prided itself in it's contribution to the world.
May's can kicking was vaguely amusing at the start but is now actively dangerous. If ever there was a time for the fabled men in grey suits to prise her fingers from the doors of No 10 this is it. ...
Or perhaps the fabled men in white coats.
It is understandable to have a go at TM but is this another example of knowing what you are against rather knowing a way out of this mess
I'm sure we can all think of several reasonable ways out of the mess. The difficulty is the dysfunctional state of the Tory party, and the attitude that the first priority is to humour the Tory party rather than acting in the country's best interests.
Just as a matter of interest what is your way out that would receive majority support to pass the HOC
The Corbyn Customs Union plan would pass if May endorsed it, and DUP as well as SNP would support too, as would the EU.
Big G has a blind spot re that.
Party b4 Country I assume
No - it is not leaving and the EU would only agree subject to free movement, rule taking, and paying in
Remain is the better option
I thought we were talking options that could pass the Commons Remain won't
Thanks @Cyclefree for a thoughtful header. I was particularly struck by this passage in the Henderson Dispatch, which I don't previously recall reading.
Top paragraph page 5: "In any case the UK has a large population accustomed to and skilled in industrial life, who within the confines of the British Isles, would suffer a large drop in standards were they to become the pioneers of of a de-industrial revolution."
Some of the issues in the Despatch are obselete, but this strikes me as very prescient. Henderson was a favourite of Maggie, but she must have skipped this bit. Overall the economy has become better, but in new service industries and regions. The rust belts of our coalfields have this in common with Ohio or Picardy. A Brexit that fails to meet the needs of those people 40 years on, is not going to be a success.
Of course, previous national narratives were not universally supported, whether colonial conquest, or joining the EEC. Indeed they were quite divisive. One of the reasons for British nostalgia for WW2 was that it was a brief period in modern times where the nation was nearly entirely united. For the other 95% of the 20th Century we were pretty much as divided as the present.
I liked the reference in that same paragraph to the 18th C nobility willing to let others suffer economically so that they could preserve their way of life. As well as the reference to not assuming that our way of life will continue as now if economic circumstances change. Both statements apply today - the first to some of the more extreme Brexiteers and the latter to all those happily assuming that a No Deal Brexit will be like now but without all the bad bits of the EU.
If Brexit were a genuine attempt to help those areas which have not benefited from EU membership it would have quite a lot going for it. But I fear that it isn't and it won't and that it will likely make things a load worse.
I’m no expert but from what I have read on here a permanent CU with the EU would mean us having to accept goods tariff free from third party countries who have FTA with EU but we cannot in return get tariff free access to their markets as they have no incentive to offer that to us . It would be lose lose for the UK . If this is Corbyns plan surely it is a non starter?
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
It's going to be us until another home nation wins the Webb Ellis Trophy.
You couldn't make it up could you? It's difficult to see the point of Brexit now. I mean, to me and most economic literates it always was difficult but now even all but the most knee jerking little Englanders must be able to see it.
1. Who is ever going to trust us? We want everyone to treat us fairly but are quite happy to break our obligations. 2. We are seen to be effectively abandoning UK citizens living abroad. 3. We expect everyone to give us most-favoured nation terms when the reality is that the few people who don't actively dislike us are seeking the very best terms they can squeeze out of us. 4. We have broken promises to foreign investors and partners.
I'm reminded of the decision of 17th Century Japan to cut themselves off from the world for two hundred years. Perhaps that's it? 200 years of self-inflicted isolation. A fitting end to a once great nation that prided itself on it's internationalism and prided itself in it's contribution to the world.
May's can kicking was vaguely amusing at the start but is now actively dangerous. If ever there was a time for the fabled men in grey suits to prise her fingers from the doors of No 10 this is it. ...
Or perhaps the fabled men in white coats.
It is understandable to have a go at TM but is this another example of knowing what you are against rather knowing a way out of this mess
I'm sure we can all think of several reasonable ways out of the mess. The difficulty is the dysfunctional state of the Tory party, and the attitude that the first priority is to humour the Tory party rather than acting in the country's best interests.
Just as a matter of interest what is your way out that would receive majority support to pass the HOC
The Corbyn Customs Union plan would pass if May endorsed it, and DUP as well as SNP would support too, as would the EU.
Big G has a blind spot re that.
Party b4 Country I assume
No - it is not leaving and the EU would only agree subject to free movement, rule taking, and paying in
Remain is the better option
I thought we were talking options that could pass the Commons Remain won't
I’m no expert but from what I have read on here a permanent CU with the EU would mean us having to accept goods tariff free from third party countries who have FTA with EU but we cannot in return get tariff free access to their markets as they have no incentive to offer that to us . It would be lose lose for the UK . If this is Corbyns plan surely it is a non starter?
It's all very well saying MPs won't support this or that. But frankly it's the MPs - and particularly the Tory MPs - who have got us into this mess, and they are very rapidly running out of time to indulge themselves in the luxury of being against things without being able to come up with an alternative.
It is each and every one of the 498 mps who voted for A50 with default no deal who are responsible
Do you have a solution that will receive majority support in tbe HOC and is doable
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I’m no expert but from what I have read on here a permanent CU with the EU would mean us having to accept goods tariff free from third party countries who have FTA with EU but we cannot in return get tariff free access to their markets as they have no incentive to offer that to us . It would be lose lose for the UK . If this is Corbyns plan surely it is a non starter?
Yes but this is a special #CorbynsCustomsUnion in which we will have a much greater say. A #CustomsUnicorn, if you prefer.
I think there is a third option - a radical re-imagining of the nation state for the 21st Century. Your notions of the Left and Right shift are the mindsets of the 20th Century (or even further back). We need something different and better.
It goes right back to the fundamentals - the kind of society and communities we want, the kind of decision making process best equipped to a digital age, the nature of work, the economic model we want to follow, the places we want to live in, the ways we want to relax.
Leaving the EU affords us the opportunity to re-invent ourselves from the ground up and it's a debate that ought to begin the minute we leave the EU. Confronting those who feel alienated, disengaged and discontent and challenging power in all its form is what we should be about in the 2020s.
Unfortunately, all we have is Corbyn's clapped out socialism and the Conservatives' clapped out old Thatcherism.
Excellent points - and it certainly sounds a more alluring 3rd way than Tony and Bill's.
Couple of things though -
VERY ambitious.
And are these the sort of issues that we are more likely to tackle successfully outside the EU rather than in?
Bollox, the UK is led by donkeys, the opposition are donkeys , it will be an unmitigated disaster and only benefit the donkeys and their chums.
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
It is each and every one of the 498 mps who voted for A50 with default no deal who are responsible
Do you have a solution that will receive majority support in tbe HOC and is doable
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
And of course there were several amendments to the deal most of which failed. This week will be of interest in that respect as other amendments are voted on
I’m no expert but from what I have read on here a permanent CU with the EU would mean us having to accept goods tariff free from third party countries who have FTA with EU but we cannot in return get tariff free access to their markets as they have no incentive to offer that to us . It would be lose lose for the UK . If this is Corbyns plan surely it is a non starter?
Yes but this is a special #CorbynsCustomsUnion in which we will have a much greater say. A #CustomsUnicorn, if you prefer.
Except the EU supported it as a way forward, so maybe not a unicorn at all.
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
This discussion jumped he shark some time ago. I think we need to dial it down.
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
But more particularly, it's the Tories who are responsible, because they are the ones who came up with the idea of the referendum in the first place, purely out of a desire to make political capital out of the idea.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
If you have your eyes closed - for example because you are pretending it is somebody else - you might not see the phone being brought into play.
Doesn't this all rather suggest that it might be better to know a bit more about the person you are being intimate with before starting on the intimacy?
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
This discussion jumped he shark some time ago. I think we need to dial it down.
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
Close to it. It is unbelievably irresponsible to keep kicking the can like this.
Well May made it clear this was her strategy when she chose to kick the vote from December to the New Year.
Since then both MPs in her own party and MPs across the house have had a chance to eject her and on both times MPs have chosen to stick with May and stick with her can kicking. They should have gotten rid of her when they had the chance.
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
This discussion jumped he shark some time ago. I think we need to dial it down.
Good call. Right on the button.
I don't think we want to get hung up on phone puns either.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
She may not have a choice. Not may it make a difference.
If we go down to the wire, then sign May's crap deal in the final days, that could be the worst of all worlds.
It means we'll be subjected to May's crap deal going forwards while inflicting the damage of No Deal anyway as companies are forced to invoke their No Deal preparations as we're too close to the deadline.
There's already ships in the water that don't know what paperwork they need when they arrive. We're already past the point of being taken to No Deal.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
If it's true that Michael Gove is terrified of being culpable for a No Deal Brexit, by accident or design May is putting him in a position where will have no choice but to call for revocation and renounce Brexit entirely.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
With respect no its not. People call their own team us, that could be on this site England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
If you have your eyes closed - for example because you are pretending it is somebody else - you might not see the phone being brought into play.
So phone play as part of fore play?
When I was in St Petersburg a few years ago, there were loads of tourists in the Hermitage, virtually all of whom were photographing on their phones the pictures. Very few of them actually bothered looking at any of the paintings, with their eyes. The photos would all have been nowhere near as good as in the excellent guidebooks available.
You see the same thing when people are in the outdoors in front of some beautiful countryside. Instead of just being, feeling the wind or sun etc they are recording it. But what are they recording? There is no experience of the actual place because the only thing that is being done is taking a photo. It's as if people have lost the art of actually being in a place, seeing a beautiful object, feeling a sensation.
It is a curious way to live - to experience life, including sex, second-hand, through a tiny screen you have to squint at.
I find it baffling. The best memories are in your head not in some pixels somewhere.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I do understand all of that of course, but I repeat no deal will not happen
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
This discussion jumped he shark some time ago. I think we need to dial it down.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
Agreed. For heaven's sake some touchiness is reasonable and some is not, and I despair at the idea that such a casual level of language is projected to mean something essentially hateful. It just causes huge resentment as it projects ill motivation and evil thoughts where none exists.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
With respect no its not. People call their own team us, that could be on this site England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
The xenophobic's mantra , it was just banter, refuge of the scoundrels.
I for one had never come across Nico Henderson's analysis - what remarkable insight it shows.
I fear we may be about to enter a period of significant decline as we cut ourselves adrift from Europe once again.
I do wonder how the other 94% of the planet not tied to the EU manage to survive and thrive given that apparently it is impossible to exist as a civilisation without EU membership.
Well 80% of that 94% exist and 'thrive' at much lower standards of living than we have enjoyed, and most of the remainder benefit from their own large markets or huge supplies of natural resources.
Since we don't have either of the latter, a drift to relative poverty is what we will face.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
If you have your eyes closed - for example because you are pretending it is somebody else - you might not see the phone being brought into play.
So phone play as part of fore play?
When I was in St Petersburg a few years ago, there were loads of tourists in the Hermitage, virtually all of whom were photographing on their phones the pictures. Very few of them actually bothered looking at any of the paintings, with their eyes. The photos would all have been nowhere near as good as in the excellent guidebooks available.
You see the same thing when people are in the outdoors in front of some beautiful countryside. Instead of just being, feeling the wind or sun etc they are recording it. But what are they recording? There is no experience of the actual place because the only thing that is being done is taking a photo. It's as if people have lost the art of actually being in a place, seeing a beautiful object, feeling a sensation.
It is a curious way to live - to experience life, including sex, second-hand, through a tiny screen you have to squint at.
I find it baffling. The best memories are in your head not in some pixels somewhere.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
I feel very old-fashioned. Were it not for work, I wouldn't bother having a phone at all. And I could happily live without a landline as well.
But I am of the generation which grew up with the phone in the cold hall and parents tut-tutting about the cost of it all if one dared use it for more than the bare minimum.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
With respect no its not. People call their own team us, that could be on this site England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
International matches are different
I have to say Big G that as a man whose mother was from Caerphilly and father from Oswestry it still does my heart good to see the Frenchies getting a good pounding.
It's not quite as satisfying as seeing the English being brutally hammered at Twickenham, but it's close.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
She may not have a choice. Not may it make a difference.
If we go down to the wire, then sign May's crap deal in the final days, that could be the worst of all worlds.
It means we'll be subjected to May's crap deal going forwards while inflicting the damage of No Deal anyway as companies are forced to invoke their No Deal preparations as we're too close to the deadline.
There's already ships in the water that don't know what paperwork they need when they arrive. We're already past the point of being taken to No Deal.
Quite right. The damage has already started. Things can only get worse from here.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
With respect no its not. People call their own team us, that could be on this site England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
International matches are different
How?
I grew up in Australia. During the Ashes I would refer to the England team as us, nobody ever misunderstood me. I know friends from countries all over the world who support their own nation. There is absolutely no difference.
If someone living here supports say Pakistan and referred to Pakistan as "us" would you object to that? People have the right to support whoever they support whether it be domestic or international.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
With respect, that's missing the point. What she's doing is making a No Deal Brexit inevitable. That will very likely damage the country.
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I do understand all of that of course, but I repeat no deal will not happen
So why do you say that? And what do you think will happen to stop No Deal happening?
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
I feel very old-fashioned. Were it not for work, I wouldn't bother having a phone at all. And I could happily live without a landline as well.
But I am of the generation which grew up with the phone in the cold hall and parents tut-tutting about the cost of it all if one dared use it for more than the bare minimum.
Autres temps, autres moeurs.
One girl at my school needed two new phones within six months. I asked why and she said she'd dropped them in the bath. I decided I didn't really need or want to know more.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
How are they different?
Look - it is not important to me but I do understand that in the context of the six nations many will not appreciate England winning
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
I feel very old-fashioned. Were it not for work, I wouldn't bother having a phone at all. And I could happily live without a landline as well.
But I am of the generation which grew up with the phone in the cold hall and parents tut-tutting about the cost of it all if one dared use it for more than the bare minimum.
Autres temps, autres moeurs.
What, no lock on the dial? You don't know how lucky you were.
(My brother and I learnt how to 'dial' a number on the locked phone by tapping it out on the handset plunger, one tap for 1, two fo 2 etc. with a short pause between each. Usually a couple of mis-dials before you got the friend's number you were after!)
Look - it is not important to me but I do understand that in the context of the six nations many will not appreciate England winning
Well of course. It's sport. But why is it being turned into some sort of political statement on anglo-centrism? @_Anazina_ simply expressed their happiness that their team won.
I for one had never come across Nico Henderson's analysis - what remarkable insight it shows.
I fear we may be about to enter a period of significant decline as we cut ourselves adrift from Europe once again.
I do wonder how the other 94% of the planet not tied to the EU manage to survive and thrive given that apparently it is impossible to exist as a civilisation without EU membership.
Well 80% of that 94% exist and 'thrive' at much lower standards of living than we have enjoyed, and most of the remainder benefit from their own large markets or huge supplies of natural resources.
Since we don't have either of the latter, a drift to relative poverty is what we will face.
Nonsense. Socialism caused Britain's decline and it only ended not when we joined the EEC but rather when Thatcher fixed our economy (the Winter of Discontent was after we joined).
Globally comparable English=speaking developed nations perform at least as well as we do.
The referendum was an act of democracy and if many did not like the result that is not the fault of the referendum
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I do understand all of that of course, but I repeat no deal will not happen
So why do you say that? And what do you think will happen to stop No Deal happening?
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
How are they different?
Look - it is not important to me but I do understand that in the context of the six nations many will not appreciate England winning
And within the context of the Premier League many will not appreciate Liverpool winning [if they do].
Why is no-one talking about the Bezos story: in particular the attempted blackmail of Jeff Bezos by the National Enquirer, where they basically said "stop suggesting we're backing Trump, or we'll print naked pictures of you?"
The most interesting part of the story is the suggestion that they messages were not obtained by some normal means — by one party to the messaging, or a person able to access their devices/accounts — but potentially by a state actor. As yet though no evidence has been presented to support the claim.
Why would anyone with any sense allow photos of themselves naked or in flagrante to be taken let alone allow them to be sent electronically?
It is a bit difficult to physically prevent one's partner from whipping out their phone in the middle of the act and taking a picture of you. And if that person had an account or otherwise used cloud storage then the image will be stored offphone in another location. It is that location that can be hacked. If memory serves this was the cause of several rude photos of slebs being made public in the early 2010s
Really?
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You and me both.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
This discussion jumped he shark some time ago. I think we need to dial it down.
Good call. Right on the button.
I don't think we want to get hung up on phone puns either.
Message received, loud and clear. I wouldn't want to create dis cord.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
With respect no its not. People call their own team us, that could be on this site England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
International matches are different
I have to say Big G that as a man whose mother was from Caerphilly and father from Oswestry it still does my heart good to see the Frenchies getting a good pounding.
It's not quite as satisfying as seeing the English being brutally hammered at Twickenham, but it's close.
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
An extension is just dragging the process out, it is not a destination. We still need to end up at either no deal, this deal, a different deal or revoke. There are no other options.
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
People these days carry their phone with them wherever they go, with the possible exception of the shower. I agree that it is weird but that's what people do.
I feel very old-fashioned. Were it not for work, I wouldn't bother having a phone at all. And I could happily live without a landline as well.
But I am of the generation which grew up with the phone in the cold hall and parents tut-tutting about the cost of it all if one dared use it for more than the bare minimum.
Autres temps, autres moeurs.
What, no lock on the dial? You don't know how lucky you were.
(My brother and I learnt how to 'dial' a number on the locked phone by tapping it out on the handset plunger, one tap for 1, two fo 2 etc. with a short pause between each. Usually a couple of mis-dials before you got the friend's number you were after!)
This is getting into 4 Yorkshiremen territory I know. But I remember Button A and Button B phones and one of my early memories is my father telling me always to have tuppenny pieces in my coat or bag so that I could make calls home from a phone box (remember them?)
When we were in Italy, if we wanted to call England we had to book an international call and wait around the phone at the appointed hour for the operator to connect you. Phone calls seemed like very exciting and rare events. Not the banalities you hear on buses every day.
Look - it is not important to me but I do understand that in the context of the six nations many will not appreciate England winning
Well of course. It's sport. But why is it being turned into some sort of political statement on anglo-centrism? @_Anazina_ simply expressed their happiness that their team won.
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I do understand all of that of course, but I repeat no deal will not happen
So why do you say that? And what do you think will happen to stop No Deal happening?
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
How will a deal be passed? Which 116 MPs will change their mind?
An extension, as another poster has already pointed out, is not an alternative to a No Deal.
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
An extension is just dragging the process out, it is not a destination. We still need to end up at either no deal, this deal, a different deal or revoke. There are no other options.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
Big G you don’t get to make the rules here. The usage was fine.
In answer to your question I would say undoubtedly yes. If we do not leave the EU we will never realign to meet those challenges and will be dragged down along with the rest of Europe in a stupid vainglorious attempt to stand toe to toe with China and the US.
It is not a matter of romance it is a matter of accepting basic reality.
Truth is, you are an unusual Brexiteer. I will go further. If we take a random sample of 11 of them, then add you in to make the round dozen, then take the group off for an away-day to a residential complex which has 2 dining rooms, one for those who share your reasons for wanting to leave the EU, your hopes & expectations for what it will bring, and the other one for those who don't, you will find that when 8 pm comes around you will be eating alone.
I agree with you. But that is quite a detailed metaphor to illustrate it.
With respect, you're not reading what I'm writing.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I am reading your comments but I do not understand your reasoning. TM is elected leader of the party and of course she has to do her best to keep the party united as difficult as it may seem. It certainly does not seem to be damaging the party in the polls
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
I say this with all honesty. TM will not lead this country into no deal
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
No Deal will happen on March 29th unless something else happens instead. May's Deal has been defeated. She has not got - and is highly unlikely to get - any changes to the WA which will make 116 of those 230 MPs who voted against the deal last month change their vote and support it.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
I do understand all of that of course, but I repeat no deal will not happen
So why do you say that? And what do you think will happen to stop No Deal happening?
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
How will a deal be passed? Which 116 MPs will change their mind?
An extension, as another poster has already pointed out, is not an alternative to a No Deal.
Apparently upto 60 labour mps are coming onside and when the choice is Norway or no brexit many conservatives will vote the deal through otherwise a mutually agreed extension of some kind will be agreed
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
An extension is just dragging the process out, it is not a destination. We still need to end up at either no deal, this deal, a different deal or revoke. There are no other options.
Extension is an option. No deal is not
An extension is not an option. It requires the consent of the EU. Why would they give it? What would it achieve?
No Deal is the destination. May is ruling out all alternatives and has not set out any plausible way either to change the WA so as to get the majority needed or persuade enough MPs to change their mind on the existing WA.
Her only plan - as far as I can see - is to run out of time in order that MPs, out of fear, will vote for the WA.
It is such a culpably negligent and harmful way to run our affairs. Really quite disgraceful. Such a shame that we do not have a way of making politicians behaving like this personally responsible for the harm caused, in the way that councillors used to be.
Fantastic performance by us today against an almost inconceivably poor French side. I think we’ll win the Grand Slam with plenty of points to spare.
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Actually, the relentless Anglo-centrism of posts like the above is equally tiresome (we are not all the "us" of "Fantastic performance by us", there are many posters who are "them").
Well said.
Oh come on. Why the chip on the shoulder? It's quite clear who they mean by saying "us". It's very common in English to describe ones team as 'us'...
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
I am half English half Welsh so I can see both sides of the argument but it is common for the Celts to be quite touchy on this subject
But why?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
You are not seeing that International matches are different
Big G you don’t get to make the rules here. The usage was fine.
I would not be so presumptive and if some are upset I apologise
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership. This is a classic case of salami slicing. They take the Single Market membership and then point out that to have an open border we must accept Single Market membership as well.
? I don't think you need either, you just need an FTA with Ireland, right?
Well you need an FTA with the EU not Ireland. But that is not currently on offer and what Corbyn suggests will not solve the issue.
Isn't any arrangement that gives regulatory alignment the answer to a hard border. The problem is if your particular fanciful notion of the benefit of Brexit is the ability to set your own regulations. If you want that then a hard border is inevitable regardless. Agreements, technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
I for one had never come across Nico Henderson's analysis - what remarkable insight it shows.
I fear we may be about to enter a period of significant decline as we cut ourselves adrift from Europe once again.
I do wonder how the other 94% of the planet not tied to the EU manage to survive and thrive given that apparently it is impossible to exist as a civilisation without EU membership.
Well 80% of that 94% exist and 'thrive' at much lower standards of living than we have enjoyed, and most of the remainder benefit from their own large markets or huge supplies of natural resources.
Since we don't have either of the latter, a drift to relative poverty is what we will face.
Nonsense. Socialism caused Britain's decline and it only ended not when we joined the EEC but rather when Thatcher fixed our economy (the Winter of Discontent was after we joined).
Globally comparable English=speaking developed nations perform at least as well as we do.
In what way did Thatcher 'fix' our economy? She ruined the lives of many and brought misery to millions with her sadomasochistic monetarism in her first term - policies later abandoned by Lawson. Unemployment soared under her stewardship and - despite the bonus of North Sea Oil - the Balance of Payments deteriorated. Inflation, at the time of her departure, was unchanged from the level inherited from Callaghan 11.5 years earlier - indeed inflation was higher for most of her last full year in office than in Callaghan's final year. Despite the Privatisation receipts , by 1990 the Public Finances were again in a sorry state.
In the end one of two things, a deal will pass or an extension will be agreed
An extension is just dragging the process out, it is not a destination. We still need to end up at either no deal, this deal, a different deal or revoke. There are no other options.
Extension is an option. No deal is not
An extension is not an option. It requires the consent of the EU. Why would they give it? What would it achieve?
No Deal is the destination. May is ruling out all alternatives and has not set out any plausible way either to change the WA so as to get the majority needed or persuade enough MPs to change their mind on the existing WA.
Her only plan - as far as I can see - is to run out of time in order that MPs, out of fear, will vote for the WA.
It is such a culpably negligent and harmful way to run our affairs. Really quite disgraceful. Such a shame that we do not have a way of making politicians behaving like this personally responsible for the harm caused, in the way that councillors used to be.
Re your first sentence, to avoid an economic wasteland and an EU border imposed on Ireland by the EU
Comments
But if it's so obvious that Corbyn doesn't mean what he's said, why not call his bluff? Because you can be sure that if the offer's just ignored, and if things go badly wrong, then you can be sure the Tories will never hear the last of the fact that May simply ignored a Labour proposal that even the EU told her was a promising way out of the difficulty.
Party b4 Country I assume
(The nerdish jingoism about ancient conflicts on here is utterly tiresome, but expected)
Remain is the better option
Incidentally, here is what Verhofstadt actually said:
"We can't have an agreement with uncertainty in the UK based on majorities of six, seven, eight or nine votes in the House of Commons.
"A cross-party co-operation is the way forward and I think I can say that we welcome also the letter that Jeremy Corbyn has written today to Mrs May to offer such a cross-party exit.
"It's important now that this leads to a position in the UK that has the broadest possible majority, so that we can conclude these negotiations."
That's welcoming the offer to talk, not the specific proposals, although I know Tusk is supposed to be more enthusiastic.
But, to be cynical, people still want to be taught even if, in their heart of hearts, they wonder how much people really will change.
And the other part of my job is doing investigations - which is what I've been doing for the last 5 months and very interesting and lucrative it is too.
And as for majority support in the House of Commons, if Theresa May actually showed some statesmanship and leadership - rather than burying her head in the sand and continuing to do and say the same thing over and over and over again - of course that would affect the level of support. She could have called a referendum herself, for example.
Alternatively, the Labour proposal might receive majority support. There's only one way to find out. And the EU certainly seems to think it's doable.
Of course the government has got itself into a situation in which whatever it does it's going to be damaged. But the government has brought that on itself. For the good of the country, it needs to bite the bullet and resolve the problem, and take the consequences.
I mean, is it really that difficult to have sex with someone and not have your phone with you? Or switch it off?
And if they did and you didn't want to be photographed, a sharp kick and pants on pronto should be the response. What kind of narcissist concentrates on filming themselves / you while making love? Yuck - on so many levels.
Where do they keep their phones during the act in question?
Because I now have some strange images in my mind...
You know there is insufficient support, even now, for a referendum so the idea TM could have called one is, with respect, nonsense
You say the government needs to bite the bullet to resolve the problem but which bullet do you mean in view of the HOC deadlock
If Brexit were a genuine attempt to help those areas which have not benefited from EU membership it would have quite a lot going for it. But I fear that it isn't and it won't and that it will likely make things a load worse.
Edit: ah, beaten to it
I doubt he has any idea what it would entail.
It's meaningless to say there's isn't a majority in the Commons for this course or that course, when the government isn't supporting this course or that course. The point is that the government is acquiescing in the "deadlock" because it's frightened that the Tory party will be damaged. If the government accepted that it can't avoid damage to the Tory party, took a tough decision and actually started leading, that could break the deadlock. If the government carries on doing nothing, it's not clear that the deadlock will ever be broken.
I have happily had a lot of very enjoyable sex over the years without needing a phone, of any type, anywhere near me or my partner.
Now - I don't know whether I've been missing out or just been incredibly lucky.
And of course there were several amendments to the deal most of which failed. This week will be of interest in that respect as other amendments are voted on
Whether or not it keeps the Tories united or up in the polls is irrelevant.
What I dislike so very much about May and the Tories at the moment is that they are putting their party's interests above the interests of the country.
And it is not hurting the party in the polls
Since then both MPs in her own party and MPs across the house have had a chance to eject her and on both times MPs have chosen to stick with May and stick with her can kicking. They should have gotten rid of her when they had the chance.
Not everything is a slight against the Welsh, Irish or Scots. Don't be such sore losers.
She has ruled out revocation of Article 50 and a referendum.
So, sorry, if she continues as she is doing No Deal is exactly the destination she is heading for.
If we go down to the wire, then sign May's crap deal in the final days, that could be the worst of all worlds.
It means we'll be subjected to May's crap deal going forwards while inflicting the damage of No Deal anyway as companies are forced to invoke their No Deal preparations as we're too close to the deadline.
There's already ships in the water that don't know what paperwork they need when they arrive. We're already past the point of being taken to No Deal.
It could also be Man City. If a City fan wrote here that was a fantastic performance by us today, taking us back to the top of the table, I think we'll win the League ... or a Liverpool fan wrote that yesterday would you say that it is tiresome as not everyone here supports Man City/Liverpool?
If I were to say "I still can't believe we beat Manchester City!" doesn't mean I think everyone here is a Newcastle United fan.
When I was in St Petersburg a few years ago, there were loads of tourists in the Hermitage, virtually all of whom were photographing on their phones the pictures. Very few of them actually bothered looking at any of the paintings, with their eyes. The photos would all have been nowhere near as good as in the excellent guidebooks available.
You see the same thing when people are in the outdoors in front of some beautiful countryside. Instead of just being, feeling the wind or sun etc they are recording it. But what are they recording? There is no experience of the actual place because the only thing that is being done is taking a photo. It's as if people have lost the art of actually being in a place, seeing a beautiful object, feeling a sensation.
It is a curious way to live - to experience life, including sex, second-hand, through a tiny screen you have to squint at.
I find it baffling. The best memories are in your head not in some pixels somewhere.
Since we don't have either of the latter, a drift to relative poverty is what we will face.
I recommend you read Nicholas Henderson's note.
https://c59574e9047e61130f13-3f71d0fe2b653c4f00f32175760e96e7.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/D98F7773620F4D7EA92A697C0808A5FC.pdf
Hope all well with you and family.
But I am of the generation which grew up with the phone in the cold hall and parents tut-tutting about the cost of it all if one dared use it for more than the bare minimum.
Autres temps, autres moeurs.
It's not quite as satisfying as seeing the English being brutally hammered at Twickenham, but it's close.
I grew up in Australia. During the Ashes I would refer to the England team as us, nobody ever misunderstood me. I know friends from countries all over the world who support their own nation. There is absolutely no difference.
If someone living here supports say Pakistan and referred to Pakistan as "us" would you object to that? People have the right to support whoever they support whether it be domestic or international.
But even that's not as bad as this one:
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/18/health/teen-bathtub-electrocuted-text-trnd/index.html
(My brother and I learnt how to 'dial' a number on the locked phone by tapping it out on the handset plunger, one tap for 1, two fo 2 etc. with a short pause between each. Usually a couple of mis-dials before you got the friend's number you were after!)
Globally comparable English=speaking developed nations perform at least as well as we do.
So what's different?
When we were in Italy, if we wanted to call England we had to book an international call and wait around the phone at the appointed hour for the operator to connect you. Phone calls seemed like very exciting and rare events. Not the banalities you hear on buses every day.
An extension, as another poster has already pointed out, is not an alternative to a No Deal.
Meanwhile our terrible PM counts down the clock. The future cannot start until she is gone.
An extension is not an option. It requires the consent of the EU. Why would they give it? What would it achieve?
No Deal is the destination. May is ruling out all alternatives and has not set out any plausible way either to change the WA so as to get the majority needed or persuade enough MPs to change their mind on the existing WA.
Her only plan - as far as I can see - is to run out of time in order that MPs, out of fear, will vote for the WA.
It is such a culpably negligent and harmful way to run our affairs. Really quite disgraceful. Such a shame that we do not have a way of making politicians behaving like this personally responsible for the harm caused, in the way that councillors used to be.