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.
Depends on how you define a hard border. If your definition of a hard border is border posts and queues or if you definition of a hard border is no infrastructure at the border but having to fill in a customs declaration form. This has never been defined in the debate so the debate keeps going round in circles.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
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.
I have read it and to be honest it is pretty much meaningless in this day and age when so much has changed in the intervening period.
Just a coincidence then that the UK's fortunes, which had fared so miserably in the 30 years after the war, improved so much during the 40 years we were a member of the European market?
They didn't. They didn't start to change until 8 years after we joined the EU - which surprise surprise coincided with the arrival of Thatcher.
Bar one quarter in the mid 1980s the last time we had a balance of payments surplus with the countries of the EU/EEC was the year before we joined.
Surely the effect of North Sea Oil on the value of Sterling was quite a big influence too.
Though I agree that access to better quality* imported European consumer goods was quite a major benefit to British consumers.
Not the Alfa Sud, obviously!
Nope. The value of Sterling against the DM dropped 25% between the start and end of Thatcher's period in office. That should have made exports cheaper.
Though it would have dropped more if it hadn't been for North Sea Oil.
Serial depreciation is of course not a sign of economic success. In theory it gives space for permanent reform, in practice, in Britain as in Italy or Greece that nearly never happened. The counties became addicted to serial devaluation.
It strikes me that there is a very obvious response that Theresa May could make to Corbyn's proposal. He says he would be willing to support the Withdrawal Agreement provided the government was committed to a particular approach in the negotiations with the EU after Brexit. Why not offer Corbyn a post-Brexit general election, so that the people can decide which approach they prefer?
I suppose the objection to that is the same as the objection to every other reasonable solution - it might break the Tory party. Though she'd have to think of a different excuse for public consumption.
It is not in May's power to offer a general election. There is no guarantee she could persuade her backbenchers to vote for one. And in any case no sane person would rely on a political promise from her, her record of going back on her word is second to none.
OK - so the objection is that May has no authority over her MPs and no one trusts her. Fair enough.
No Deal does seem likelier with every day that passes.
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.
Depends on how you define a hard border. If your definition of a hard border is border posts and queues or if you definition of a hard border is no infrastructure at the border but having to fill in a customs declaration form. This has never been defined in the debate so the debate keeps going round in circles.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
As I stated quite clearly the Govt will tolerate a level of criminality over smuggling and fraud. I gave the example of VAT carousel fraud and smuggling of booze and fags in the SE of England.
When it becomes to much the State makes an effort to curtail it, when it is at a level they deem acceptable they ignore it as a price for having the least friction possible at the border to benefit businesses.
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
May's chances of achieving consensus are probably rather less than your chance of flying to the moon Mr G. Nothing in her past record suggests that she that she values consensus or knows how to bring it about.
It strikes me that there is a very obvious response that Theresa May could make to Corbyn's proposal. He says he would be willing to support the Withdrawal Agreement provided the government was committed to a particular approach in the negotiations with the EU after Brexit. Why not offer Corbyn a post-Brexit general election, so that the people can decide which approach they prefer?
I suppose the objection to that is the same as the objection to every other reasonable solution - it might break the Tory party. Though she'd have to think of a different excuse for public consumption.
It is not in May's power to offer a general election. There is no guarantee she could persuade her backbenchers to vote for one. And in any case no sane person would rely on a political promise from her, her record of going back on her word is second to none.
OK - so the objection is that May has no authority over her MPs and no one trusts her. Fair enough.
No Deal does seem likelier with every day that passes.
No Deal is looking nailed on. May is the person racing James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause.
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.
Depends on how you define a hard border. If your definition of a hard border is border posts and queues or if you definition of a hard border is no infrastructure at the border but having to fill in a customs declaration form. This has never been defined in the debate so the debate keeps going round in circles.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
As I stated quite clearly the Govt will tolerate a level of criminality over smuggling and fraud. I gave the example of VAT carousel fraud and smuggling of booze and fags in the SE of England.
When it becomes to much the State makes an effort to curtail it, when it is at a level they deem acceptable they ignore it as a price for having the least friction possible at the border to benefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
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
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
May's chances of achieving consensus are probably rather less than your chance of flying to the moon Mr G. Nothing in her past record suggests that she that she values consensus or knows how to bring it about.
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.
Get stuffed, G can give his opinion if he wants. Not your place to give out what people can do or say , wind your neck in you rude get.
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.
technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
As I stated quite clearly the Govt will tolerate a level of criminality over smuggling and fraud. I gave the example of VAT carousel fraud and smuggling of booze and fags in the SE of England.
When it becomes to much the State makes an effort to curtail it, when it is at a level they deem acceptable they ignore it as a price for having the least friction possible at the border to benefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
They will tell the police to focus on smuggled goods and the police will follow the flow of goods from trader to the public, that persons supplier and the Mister big that does the smuggling, just like they do now. If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
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.
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.
Get stuffed, G can give his opinion if he wants. Not your place to give out what people can do or say , wind your neck in you rude get.
Go fuck yourself Malc and stop pushing from the back.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership.
? 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.
technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
As I stated quite clearly the Govt will tolerate a level of criminality over smuggling and fraud. I gave the example of VAT carousel fraud and smuggling of booze and fags in the SE of England.
When it becomes to much the State makes an effort to curtail it, when it is at a level they deem acceptable they ignore it as a price for having the least friction possible at the border to benefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
They will tell the police to focus on smuggled goods and the police will follow the flow of goods from trader to the public, that persons supplier and the Mister big that does the smuggling, just like they do now. If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
How will the police know which vehicles contain goods which are not declared on customs forms without doing random checks?
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.
Get stuffed, G can give his opinion if he wants. Not your place to give out what people can do or say , wind your neck in you rude get.
Go fuck yourself Malc and stop pushing from the back.
Typical big mouthed bully , don't like it up them. Pick on someone who is not too nice to call you out for the balloon you are. Typical bully boy.
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.
Get stuffed, G can give his opinion if he wants. Not your place to give out what people can do or say , wind your neck in you rude get.
even the oldies are turning into snowflakes. What has become of Great Britain?
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
There were 9 closures in the 1950s and another 14 in the 1960s.
This is another of those left wing myths that needs killing (the point to which you are answering not your point)
In 1958 there were 700,000 men employed in coal mining in the UK. In 1979 that had dropped to 250,000. The largest number of pit closures and job losses were under Wilson in the 1960s, not Thatcher in the 1980s.
Though in the 1960's there was full employment, and unlike the 1980's, suitable well renumerated employment nearby was available.
When my grandfather's pit closed in the 1960s he was offered a job at another - it was a ten mile bike ride each way.
He was luckier than many - those in the North-East or Wales were often told to move to Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire.
"Despite the distinctly Minnesota weather, supporters turned out by the thousands on Sunday, cramming into a riverfront park wearing snow pants, ski goggles and parkas. Some even arrived on cross-country skis or brought dogs wearing coats."
Looks like a win for Corbyn there, he offers a deal that could well get a majority in the Commons and be acceptable to to the EU and May turns him down in order to continue flogging the deceased horse that is her deal. And Corbyn is thereby absolved of any responsibility for the manifest failures of the Brexit project.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership.
? 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.
technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
nefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
They will tell the police to focus on smuggled goods and the police will follow the flow of goods from trader to the public, that persons supplier and the Mister big that does the smuggling, just like they do now. If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
How will the police know which vehicles contain goods which are not declared on customs forms without doing random checks?
They do not do random checks now, Cuthbert the customs computer systems tells them what to check. In the case of NI this check will take place at the importers premises not the border.
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.
Get stuffed, G can give his opinion if he wants. Not your place to give out what people can do or say , wind your neck in you rude get.
Go fuck yourself Malc and stop pushing from the back.
Typical big mouthed bully , don't like it up them. Pick on someone who is not too nice to call you out for the balloon you are. Typical bully boy.
Sounds good Rob Roy I’ll happily pick on you. Dick.
There were 9 closures in the 1950s and another 14 in the 1960s.
This is another of those left wing myths that needs killing (the point to which you are answering not your point)
In 1958 there were 700,000 men employed in coal mining in the UK. In 1979 that had dropped to 250,000. The largest number of pit closures and job losses were under Wilson in the 1960s, not Thatcher in the 1980s.
Though in the 1960's there was full employment, and unlike the 1980's, suitable well renumerated employment nearby was available.
When my grandfather's pit closed in the 1960s he was offered a job at another - it was a ten mile bike ride each way.
He was luckier than many - those in the North-East or Wales were often told to move to Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire.
' Politically passionate and one of the first working class reporters at the BBC, Jack Ashley wanted to show the suffering caused by high unemployment in Hartlepool. (1963) '
Looks like a win for Corbyn there, he offers a deal that could well get a majority in the Commons and be acceptable to to the EU and May turns him down in order to continue flogging the deceased horse that is her deal. And Corbyn is thereby absolved of any responsibility for the manifest failures of the Brexit project.
That might be good for him. But it would be best for the rest of us if she just accepted his proposal and got a deal with a customs union. If we are going to leave it would be better to do it with the support of the bulk of both the big parties. If they are both implicated then it will be a lot less decisive.
Looks like a win for Corbyn there, he offers a deal that could well get a majority in the Commons and be acceptable to to the EU and May turns him down in order to continue flogging the deceased horse that is her deal. And Corbyn is thereby absolved of any responsibility for the manifest failures of the Brexit project.
That might be good for him. But it would be best for the rest of us if she just accepted his proposal and got a deal with a customs union. If we are going to leave it would be better to do it with the support of the bulk of both the big parties. If they are both implicated then it will be a lot less decisive.
Looks like a win for Corbyn there, he offers a deal that could well get a majority in the Commons and be acceptable to to the EU and May turns him down in order to continue flogging the deceased horse that is her deal. And Corbyn is thereby absolved of any responsibility for the manifest failures of the Brexit project.
That might be good for him. But it would be best for the rest of us if she just accepted his proposal and got a deal with a customs union. If we are going to leave it would be better to do it with the support of the bulk of both the big parties. If they are both implicated then it will be a lot less decisive.
Excellent article by Alan Johnson and John Denham in STimes on Norway Plus as way out of the mess today.
There were 9 closures in the 1950s and another 14 in the 1960s.
This is another of those left wing myths that needs killing (the point to which you are answering not your point)
In 1958 there were 700,000 men employed in coal mining in the UK. In 1979 that had dropped to 250,000. The largest number of pit closures and job losses were under Wilson in the 1960s, not Thatcher in the 1980s.
Though in the 1960's there was full employment, and unlike the 1980's, suitable well renumerated employment nearby was available.
When my grandfather's pit closed in the 1960s he was offered a job at another - it was a ten mile bike ride each way.
He was luckier than many - those in the North-East or Wales were often told to move to Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire.
Yeah, I know. Lots of Yorkshire miners in the Leics coalfields.
Disruptive of course, but nothing like the eighties.
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
Considering that the WA has taken so long, an FTA by 2021 is delusional, unless it is a continuation of the WA, and that looks a lot like Corbyns Customs Union.
If Leavers want Brexit to stick, they need a formula agreed with Labour. The logic will mean that it is Labours Deal vs No Deal.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership.
? 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.
technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
nefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
. If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
How will the police know which vehicles contain goods which are not declared on customs forms without doing random checks?
They do not do random checks now, Cuthbert the customs computer systems tells them what to check. In the case of NI this check will take place at the importers premises not the border.
They don’t do random checks now because there are no differences in tariffs to avoid. Whereas afterwards there’s a systematic incentive to smuggle goods. And there was me thinking I was the simpleton.
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership.
? 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.
lp you.
to stop.
t the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
etters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
nefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
. repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
How will the police know which vehicles contain goods which are not declared on customs forms without doing random checks?
They do not do random checks now, Cuthbert the customs computer systems tells them what to check. In the case of NI this check will take place at the importers premises not the border.
They don’t do random checks now because there are no differences in tariffs to avoid. Whereas afterwards there’s a systematic incentive to smuggle goods. And there was me thinking I was the simpleton.
What I am reffering now when I say they do not do random checks now is our current border with third party countries exporting to us. When we leave the EU we will become a third party country to the EU i.e Ireland so we we apply the same customs procedures to Ireland that we apply to third countries now.
So when a container ship from some foreign climes enters the Thames Estuary Cuthbert goes to work and selects from the electronic customs manifests what containers to check. The same will happen if the NI/Ireland border is electronic, apart from the checking will not take place at the port side or border, it will take place at the importers premises,
To prevent a border in Ireland you need both Customs Union and Single Market membership.
? 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.
technology and even leprechauns can't help you.
Sort of, but you need at least some infrastructure. A purely virtual border isn't going to stop some of the things we'd want to stop.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
I’m not sure of the correct punchline to that one either.
I’m sure @ralphmalph will be along shortly to explain it to us simpletons.
Seeing as you have declared yourself to be a simpleton, let me know what you want explaining and I will be happy to explain trying not to use any words longer than 5 letters.
How do you catch the criminals who choose not to fill in the forms without checks at the border?
nefit businesses.
How will they curtail it without checks at the border?
. If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
How will the police know which vehicles contain goods which are not declared on customs forms without doing random checks?
They do not do random checks now, Cuthbert the customs computer systems tells them what to check. In the case of NI this check will take place at the importers premises not the border.
They don’t do random checks now because there are no differences in tariffs to avoid. Whereas afterwards there’s a systematic incentive to smuggle goods. And there was me thinking I was the simpleton.
The point is repeatedly made on these pages that there are currently differences in tariffs on alcohol and cigarettes.
Those nicknames won't make much sense if he has to debate her next July.
It's interesting watching which candidates Trump is and isn't attacking as they declare. So far just her and Warren, AFAICT. An odd pair to pick to be afraid of?
There were 9 closures in the 1950s and another 14 in the 1960s.
This is another of those left wing myths that needs killing (the point to which you are answering not your point)
In 1958 there were 700,000 men employed in coal mining in the UK. In 1979 that had dropped to 250,000. The largest number of pit closures and job losses were under Wilson in the 1960s, not Thatcher in the 1980s.
Though in the 1960's there was full employment, and unlike the 1980's, suitable well renumerated employment nearby was available.
When my grandfather's pit closed in the 1960s he was offered a job at another - it was a ten mile bike ride each way.
He was luckier than many - those in the North-East or Wales were often told to move to Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire.
Yeah, I know. Lots of Yorkshire miners in the Leics coalfields.
Disruptive of course, but nothing like the eighties.
What happened in the 1980s was just the peak of a process which was already happening in the 1950s and which was also happening in old industrial areas throughout the world.
And while some old mining areas were able to be redeveloped (those in Yorkshire and the Midlands) others were always going to be 'lost causes', especially the isolated places which had no potential purpose once the old industry had gone.
In fact it has been the successfully redeveloped mining areas which had the highest Leave votes (and which have trended most to the Conservatives).
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
Or in other words, time wasting. The only consensuses agreed so far are so vague as to be meaningless or fall apart acrimoniously afterwards. Mays party won't accept a labour brexit, and Corbyn has no incentive to be helpful at all. I dislike them, but the likes of Grieve and co need to work with labour to stop the endless vacilation.
And no, wait and see is not a good idea. We've done that for half a year, it's reasonable to judge them now.
Looks like a win for Corbyn there, he offers a deal that could well get a majority in the Commons and be acceptable to to the EU and May turns him down in order to continue flogging the deceased horse that is her deal. And Corbyn is thereby absolved of any responsibility for the manifest failures of the Brexit project.
That might be good for him. But it would be best for the rest of us if she just accepted his proposal and got a deal with a customs union. If we are going to leave it would be better to do it with the support of the bulk of both the big parties. If they are both implicated then it will be a lot less decisive.
Agreed. And Corbyns potentially played it very well.
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
Or in other words, time wasting. The only consensuses agreed so far are so vague as to be meaningless or fall apart acrimoniously afterwards. Mays party won't accept a labour brexit, and Corbyn has no incentive to be helpful at all. I dislike them, but the likes of Grieve and co need to work with labour to stop the endless vacilation.
And no, wait and see is not a good idea. We've done that for half a year, it's reasonable to judge them now.
And still the emphasis on renegotiating the Withdrawal Agreement to amend the backstop. Which the EU keeps telling her it is not willing to do, and which Corbyn is not asking her to do.
I was out leafleting in one of our target wards this afternoon when I was approached by a boy of about 10, maybe 11, years of age. He said "Can I help you?" I misunderstood and assumed his house was the one I was stood outside so I said I was just delivering leaflets. He said, "No, I mean can I help you and get paid!". I politely declined the offer and explained that they're political party leaflets and we don't pay people to deliver them. He was a bit disappointed. I don't think "local Lib Dems using child labour" would've made the best impression though.
Well that bears no resemblance to Skys report just now.
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
Or in other words, time wasting. The only consensuses agreed so far are so vague as to be meaningless or fall apart acrimoniously afterwards. Mays party won't accept a labour brexit, and Corbyn has no incentive to be helpful at all. I dislike them, but the likes of Grieve and co need to work with labour to stop the endless vacilation.
And no, wait and see is not a good idea. We've done that for half a year, it's reasonable to judge them now.
And still the emphasis on renegotiating the Withdrawal Agreement to amend the backstop. Which the EU keeps telling her it is not willing to do, and which Corbyn is not asking her to do.
Those nicknames won't make much sense if he has to debate her next July.
It's interesting watching which candidates Trump is and isn't attacking as they declare. So far just her and Warren, AFAICT. An odd pair to pick to be afraid of?
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
So a bit like what the EUphiles are always accused of doing.
Those nicknames won't make much sense if he has to debate her next July.
It's interesting watching which candidates Trump is and isn't attacking as they declare. So far just her and Warren, AFAICT. An odd pair to pick to be afraid of?
Or he just has an issue with women?
The only declared Democratic candidates with any chance of winning - bar Cory Brooker - are currently all women. He hasn't it seems attacked Gillibrand, Gabbard or Harris yet - in terms of giving them nicknames anyway.
Lyin Ted, low energy Jeb Bush, Crazy Joe (Biden), Leakin Lyin James Comey, Al Frankenstein, Crazy Bernie, Mad Alex (Salmond), Sour (Don) Lemon (on CNN) and Psycho Joe (Scarborough). As one might say Trump is an equal opportunity abuser!
Britain's Armed Forces are ready to use 'hard power' against aggressors, Gavin Williamson will declare today.
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
So a bit like what the EUphiles are always accused of doing.
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
Considering that the WA has taken so long, an FTA by 2021 is delusional, unless it is a continuation of the WA, and that looks a lot like Corbyns Customs Union.
If Leavers want Brexit to stick, they need a formula agreed with Labour. The logic will mean that it is Labours Deal vs No Deal.
Most of the time has been spent discussing what happens in the event of no FTA, rather than actually negotiating one. Idiotic, I know.
Corbyn's proposal is May's Deal with a bit more honesty. Not fully honest, by any means, but I don't think Brexit is achievable without a fair scattering of unicorns. Delude people into taking the next step on false assumptions then reveal the implications after it's too late to do anything about them.
But this point has dawned on people and that makes it harder to get a hypothetical "good deal", or even a "half-decent deal", through. The flip-side of your premise is that it makes the most fanatical no-dealers the most sensible.
The merely moderately fanatical, those who might just be tempted to vote for something in the right conditions (i.e. when put under enough pressure and when enough incentives are waved in their faces), are the ones the trap is being sprung upon.
The clear-sighted will see through this. Even if an apparently brilliant deal is somehow conjured up, they will realise that voting for it would be a sign of being taken in by some form of delusion, even if they can't see quite where the trap in it has been hidden, and vote against it, even if they are unable to cogently articulate why exactly they have done so.
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?
My impression is (rightly or wrongly) that it is incredibly normalised these days ! Then again Bezos is not some random under 30 single on Tindr..
Well quite.
And for others, well, they're idiots, however normalised it may be.
I have on numerous occasions had to view what people put on their work email / work computers - including films of them having sex. In one particularly sad case, blackmail was attempted.
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.
People need a much much better understanding of how the digital world can adversely impact their privacy if they don't use it sensibly.
Yep, it’s quite amazing that people think their work emails and messages are completely private.
In my time doing investigations we found emails from sales people to friends working for competitors, giving away leads in exchange for cash commissions. The most shocking example was a young PA who was offering, shall we say extra-curricular evening services to certain customers
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
Britain's Armed Forces are ready to use 'hard power' against aggressors, Gavin Williamson will declare today.
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
Makes Portillo’s “ Who dare, wins” speech look positively statesmanlike.
Britain's Armed Forces are ready to use 'hard power' against aggressors, Gavin Williamson will declare today.
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
Hoo ha. Can you believe this shit? Banana republic stuff.
What I am reffering now when I say they do not do random checks now is our current border with third party countries exporting to us. When we leave the EU we will become a third party country to the EU i.e Ireland so we we apply the same customs procedures to Ireland that we apply to third countries now.
So when a container ship from some foreign climes enters the Thames Estuary Cuthbert goes to work and selects from the electronic customs manifests what containers to check. The same will happen if the NI/Ireland border is electronic, apart from the checking will not take place at the port side or border, it will take place at the importers premises,
Oh I see. You’re not referring (note spelling) to the Irish border, with many crossing points along narrow rural lanes where a van carrying some small but high value items can pull out of a barn at the dead of night.
No, you’re drawing on practice at a sea border where goods are transported in large container ships that are a little easier to see.
Apart from that minor detail, well argued sir, well argued.
Those nicknames won't make much sense if he has to debate her next July.
It's interesting watching which candidates Trump is and isn't attacking as they declare. So far just her and Warren, AFAICT. An odd pair to pick to be afraid of?
Or he just has an issue with women?
I wondered that, but why does Harris get a free pass?
Comments
TM is offering concessions on workers rights and the environment, makes a case against Corbyn's customs union and says that further meetings are planned with a view towards agreeing a consensus
Serial depreciation is of course not a sign of economic success. In theory it gives space for permanent reform, in practice, in Britain as in Italy or Greece that nearly never happened. The counties became addicted to serial devaluation.
No Deal does seem likelier with every day that passes.
When it becomes to much the State makes an effort to curtail it, when it is at a level they deem acceptable they ignore it as a price for having the least friction possible at the border to benefit businesses.
https://youtu.be/1AlMY9fDHu0
In a snowstorm.
https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1094695095360675840
If you want to stop all smuggling then the only way to do it is to stop imports completely and that would not work because ships would be hired to smuggle goods in. So as I have repeatedly said the state tolerates a degree of smuggling.
We both agreed that an Election would not be in our interests at the current time.
Thanks
Tessa.
Another day tomorrow and one nearer the 29th March
Lets just hope our mps grow up and come together to get this sorted
Good night folks
He was luckier than many - those in the North-East or Wales were often told to move to Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire.
"Despite the distinctly Minnesota weather, supporters turned out by the thousands on Sunday, cramming into a riverfront park wearing snow pants, ski goggles and parkas. Some even arrived on cross-country skis or brought dogs wearing coats."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/10/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-president-2020.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1094718856197799936
Is it possible the Dems can find someone who he can't give a quick fire name to?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p053r2q1
The type of program which became steadily more common throughout the 1970s and 1980s.
Disruptive of course, but nothing like the eighties.
Amy looks the best of the Democrats so far, but still a year to go to the first caucuses.
Tough lady. She can do it.
Not convinced myself.
I'm investing in Sherrod Brown.
If Leavers want Brexit to stick, they need a formula agreed with Labour. The logic will mean that it is Labours Deal vs No Deal.
Nobody needed to ask me about anti-semitism when I was leader of Labour.
So when a container ship from some foreign climes enters the Thames Estuary Cuthbert goes to work and selects from the electronic customs manifests what containers to check. The same will happen if the NI/Ireland border is electronic, apart from the checking will not take place at the port side or border, it will take place at the importers premises,
It's interesting watching which candidates Trump is and isn't attacking as they declare. So far just her and Warren, AFAICT. An odd pair to pick to be afraid of?
And while some old mining areas were able to be redeveloped (those in Yorkshire and the Midlands) others were always going to be 'lost causes', especially the isolated places which had no potential purpose once the old industry had gone.
In fact it has been the successfully redeveloped mining areas which had the highest Leave votes (and which have trended most to the Conservatives).
But as I recollect he was asked about about anti-Welsh jibes.
Why do many who would hate to be called racist or anti-Semite think it’s OK to make casually nasty anti-Welsh remarks?
And no, wait and see is not a good idea. We've done that for half a year, it's reasonable to judge them now.
https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1094744351803170816
I was out leafleting in one of our target wards this afternoon when I was approached by a boy of about 10, maybe 11, years of age. He said "Can I help you?" I misunderstood and assumed his house was the one I was stood outside so I said I was just delivering leaflets. He said, "No, I mean can I help you and get paid!". I politely declined the offer and explained that they're political party leaflets and we don't pay people to deliver them. He was a bit disappointed.
That should end well, then......
Lyin Ted, low energy Jeb Bush, Crazy Joe (Biden), Leakin Lyin James Comey, Al Frankenstein, Crazy Bernie, Mad Alex (Salmond), Sour (Don) Lemon (on CNN) and Psycho Joe (Scarborough). As one might say Trump is an equal opportunity abuser!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6689439/Were-ready-strike-against-Russia-China.html
Britain's Armed Forces are ready to use 'hard power' against aggressors, Gavin Williamson will declare today.
The Defence Secretary will say it is time to increase our 'lethality' and warn Russia and China there will be a high price for flouting international law.
In a speech in London, he will announce the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the Pacific to deter the Chinese.
The merely moderately fanatical, those who might just be tempted to vote for something in the right conditions (i.e. when put under enough pressure and when enough incentives are waved in their faces), are the ones the trap is being sprung upon.
The clear-sighted will see through this. Even if an apparently brilliant deal is somehow conjured up, they will realise that voting for it would be a sign of being taken in by some form of delusion, even if they can't see quite where the trap in it has been hidden, and vote against it, even if they are unable to cogently articulate why exactly they have done so.
In my time doing investigations we found emails from sales people to friends working for competitors, giving away leads in exchange for cash commissions. The most shocking example was a young PA who was offering, shall we say extra-curricular evening services to certain customers
Banana republic stuff.
No, you’re drawing on practice at a sea border where goods are transported in large container ships that are a little easier to see.
Apart from that minor detail, well argued sir, well argued.