Now that might be fine in practice but we should be open and acknowledge it for what it is.
Not really. If the UK largely agrees with France and Germany there is not an axis working against the UK.
Who said there was ?
But what the EU is based on is a France-Germany alliance, an alliance that the UK foreign office has for decades fantasised is about to break.
Now it may be that that is an acceptable situation for the UK and better than what out own posturing politicians and self-satisfied Sir Humphreys could achieve themselves.
If so lets at least be open about it and admit that the UK has sod all influence within the EU rather than the posture-surrender-lie pretences of Blair and Cameron.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
Or what did Cameron get when he claimed he 'halved the bill' but agreed to pay all of it after initially claiming he wouldn't pay any of it ?
And what did Cameron get in his 'renegotiation' ?
Then again we could mention the EU policy on Syrian refugees or Foot and Mouth disease.
Or lets try a hypothetical case - if the UK government said that only 13,000* immigrants would be allowed from the EU annually would the EU allow it ?
That's the reality - that may well be better than the alternatives but lets not deny it exists.
* The number the government predicted would be the maximum annual immigration.
The reality is that all countries do not get all they want in an organisation in which sovereignty is voluntarily pooled. The UK was the 5th biggest economy in the world, that we got any rebate at all is pretty extraordinary. Do you think the Germans and the French were happy about that? We were able to opt out of Schengen and the single currency. Again, were the Germans and the French delighted about this? I would be very surprised if that were the case. The Spanish had to accept Gibraltar being an integral part of the Single Market and Customs Union. They did not like that. I am afraid I just do not see us in the EU as hapless victims, powerless to prevent others from continuously shitting all over us.
Once Johnson has been PM for a few weeks I confidently expect the predictions of huge Con gains at a GE to disappear. Normally that would mean huge Lab gains would be predicted. I don't think that will happen either. So could we see predictions of a Lib Dem government instead?
I have been a Conservative Party member for over 20 years. I will not vote Conservative while we have a clown for leader. Until he is replaced by someone who is actually qualified to do such an important job I will vote LD. Whether that means we will have a LD government I would doubt, but I think there are a lot of people like me.
Fine, for every 1 of you Boris will win back 2 or 3 Brexit Party voters
The way you dismiss fellow conservative members is a disgrace
Surely you have realised by now as long as the entity called "The Conservative Party" wins HUYFD doesn't care what it stands for or what it does or who leads it. It's like football tribalism at it's worst.
I said a while ago that if the polls showed the Conservatives would gain a couple of points if they declared war on the rest of Europe he would be on here explaining why it would be a really good idea.
No, it is simply a statement of the obvious that the vast majority of Tory voters and members now want to deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and if some on here would rather Stop Brexit than deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal on October 31st then they are better off in the LDs with fellow Stop Brexit Remainers rather than endlessly whinging and complaining in the Tory Party
Well of course, all the others have already abandoned them.
More 2017 Tories have gone to the Brexit Party than the LDs
Where do you think 2015 Tories are now?
The Tories got 37% in 2015, 42% in 2017.
Plus even 2015 Tories voted 58% Leave and only 42% Remain
My point is that you shouldn't assume that there are straight switches from Tories to BXP. A lot of BXP support is almost certainly coming from historical Labour voters, or just general permanent anti-establishment protest votes which flit around the spectrum finding homes in the post unlikely places.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
Perfectly reasonable advice, delivered with some prescience 2 years ago. I'm not sure it amounts to a huge scandal, though it's unofrtunate it was leaked.
"For those of us who enjoy the guilty pleasure of an appropriately delivered “I told you so”, these really are the best of times.
The Corbyn project was always doomed and not, as many of his supporters would like to think, because he faced a hostile media. It was doomed because the man at its head is a crank. And a thoroughly unpleasant one, at that."
Sitting in the meetings where the decisions are made is irrelevant, when the Eurozone members who have an absolute majority had another meeting the day before and decided which way to vote en bloc.
Has this actually been happening? I mean, it's obviously a logical possibility, like a solid harmonious middle-eastern voting bloc at the UN consisting of Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Palestine, but in practice the Eurozone has been known to have some internal disagreements...
It’s certainly been happening when financial decision and are made, and they’re been rumours of it happening unofficially in other policy areas. It’s the natural consequence of a single currency area that has to move towards closer integration to be viable.
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
Perfectly reasonable advice, delivered with some prescience 2 years ago. I'm not sure it amounts to a huge scandal, though it's unofrtunate it was leaked.
Quite. It would be a dereliction of duty not to report these kinds of statements about the US administration.
Question is who is leaking and why? Something to do with Farage?
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
He was just stating the obvious . It’s not his fault it was leaked . I expect Trump will be on the phone to tell Bozo to sack him . And of course the lapdog that is the UK after Brexit will do just that .
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I rolled my eyes when he started with the unhinged nonsense that Theresa May’s deal is Brexit In Name Only. The article deteriorated from there.
He sets out clearly why it is BINO.
The withdrawal agreement and the political declaration place us at the disposal of the EU, which safeguards its privileged access to our market (which it can also offer to others without our consent), keeps us indefinitely under EU jurisdiction directly applicable through UK courts, gives the EU the right to impose fines and trade sanctions and explicitly denies any recourse to international arbitration.
Which is not actually correct. In fact, the WA specifically withdraws us from the jurisdiction of the EU legal system.
So I can only conclude he hasn't read it.
There are two options.
1) Robert Tombs is an idiot.
2) Robert Tombs is not an idiot, knows what he writing is rubbish but is willing to do it anyway for the money and the publicity.
I’m not sure which is worse.
Didn't he also sign that letter about GATT rules which Cash described as the definitive legal ruling on the topic when even a cursory reading of it showed that it was twaddle from start to finish?
Yes, it was him. He ought to stick to medieval history or whatever his speciality is.
Still, writing rubbish for money is very on trend these days. One of its finest proponents is about to become PM. So one can hardly blame Tombs for wanting to join in.
No tinge of bitterness there that your wonderful pieces for pb.com are pro bono.....
None at all. Honoured to have a platform and audience and that they delight.
(Still, if someone wants to shower ££££ in my general direction, feel free. I have an expensive plant habit to support. . )
Revealing isn't it that the example always given of British influence in the EU is the single market.
Something which was discussed back in the 1980s and given the UK's cumulative trade deficit within the single market perhaps not the best idea in retrospect.
As to expansion of the EU wasn't the UK strategy to have a 'broader' EU rather than a 'deeper' EU and the result was an EU both broader and deeper.
And as I remember Germany was rather keen on the single market and both France and Germany were keen on EU expansion into their traditional areas on interest.
Another UK demand is not having the EU army that Germany wanted. There are more examples.
In any case the point is not about UK influence on the EU; it's about UK influence on decisions that affect the UK. We won't formally have influence after we leave. Turning up to the meetings where the decisions affecting us are made and having a vote are the important differences.
Well the EU army is coming sooner or later, we all know that.
Though it will probably have more generals than tanks.
The UK can no longer prevent it, that is certainly true.
In effect we could never have prevented it, its all part of EverCloserUnion.
Britain has been an enabler of it. The UK could have opted out of the EU Military Service (as Ireland did) but instead they sent a 1* to run the Ops Directorate.
NATO obviously isn't going to survive in its current form and most of Europe (including the UK) gets this.
Sitting in the meetings where the decisions are made is irrelevant, when the Eurozone members who have an absolute majority had another meeting the day before and decided which way to vote en bloc.
As a member the UK has a vote. That is a hard fact of membership. The EU goes to lengths to avoid votes against, which is where the horse trading and the fudge come in. Out of the EU, the UK is one less party for the EU to accommodate in its decision making, but as long as we are part of its system we will be bound by those decisions taken without reference to us. Malta will quite genuinely have greater influence over the decisions that affect it than we will, because it will have a vote and we won't.
To return to the original point, that's the practical difference between joint decision making and rule taking. I can see why Leavers don't want rule taking. But if we are part of the EU system, as the only probable Brexit end state, is it better to refuse any role in making those decisions?
I rolled my eyes when he started with the unhinged nonsense that Theresa May’s deal is Brexit In Name Only. The article deteriorated from there.
He sets out clearly why it is BINO.
The withdrawal agreement and the political declaration place us at the disposal of the EU, which safeguards its privileged access to our market (which it can also offer to others without our consent), keeps us indefinitely under EU jurisdiction directly applicable through UK courts, gives the EU the right to impose fines and trade sanctions and explicitly denies any recourse to international arbitration.
Which is not actually correct. In fact, the WA specifically withdraws us from the jurisdiction of the EU legal system.
So I can only conclude he hasn't read it.
There are two options.
1) Robert Tombs is an idiot.
2) Robert Tombs is not an idiot, knows what he writing is rubbish but is willing to do it anyway for the money and the publicity.
I’m not sure which is worse.
Didn't he also sign that letter about GATT rules which Cash described as the definitive legal ruling on the topic when even a cursory reading of it showed that it was twaddle from start to finish?
Yes, it was him. He ought to stick to medieval history or whatever his speciality is.
Still, writing rubbish for money is very on trend these days. One of its finest proponents is about to become PM. So one can hardly blame Tombs for wanting to join in.
No tinge of bitterness there that your wonderful pieces for pb.com are pro bono.....
None at all. Honoured to have a platform and audience and that they delight.
(Still, if someone wants to shower ££££ in my general direction, feel free. I have an expensive plant habit to support. . )
You can have the £1 TSE owes me when Boris beats Hunt in the Tory membership vote if you like!
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
He was just stating the obvious . It’s not his fault it was leaked . I expect Trump will be on the phone to tell Bozo to sack him . And of course the lapdog that is the UK after Brexit will do just that .
I am reading the fire and the fury at the moment, written by an insider, and it has to be said that disfunctional is an understatement. Trump acts like a child with an attention span to match
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
Darroch is clearly a staunch Remainer and anti Trump and his messages back conveyed that.
Ashcroft has strong ties to the US, is intelligent, has a business background and extensive connections in the US and would be an Ambassador who believes in Brexit and is not anti Trump
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
Or what did Cameron get when he claimed he 'halved the bill' but agreed to pay all of it after initially claiming he wouldn't pay any of it ?
And what did Cameron get in his 'renegotiation' ?
Then again we could mention the EU policy on Syrian refugees or Foot and Mouth disease.
Or lets try a hypothetical case - if the UK government said that only 13,000* immigrants would be allowed from the EU annually would the EU allow it ?
That's the reality - that may well be better than the alternatives but lets not deny it exists.
* The number the government predicted would be the maximum annual immigration.
The reality is that all countries do not get all they want in an organisation in which sovereignty is voluntarily pooled. The UK was the 5th biggest economy in the world, that we got any rebate at all is pretty extraordinary. Do you think the Germans and the French were happy about that? We were able to opt out of Schengen and the single currency. Again, were the Germans and the French delighted about this? I would be very surprised if that were the case. The Spanish had to accept Gibraltar being an integral part of the Single Market and Customs Union. They did not like that. I am afraid I just do not see us in the EU as hapless victims, powerless to prevent others from continuously shitting all over us.
So you cannot provide answers to any of the examples I gave ?
In other words not 'getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU'.
And regarding the Rebate, how was it gained in the 1980s ? By Thatcher playing hardball and threatening to bring things to a stop.
Not something our politicians have done since. Perhaps if they had done so a few times things would have developed differently.
Plus Gibraltar is not part of the Customs Union, in fact I believe it has a similar status to Ceuta and Melilla so I'm not seeing the great victory you seem to think exists there.
And given that you were willing to agree to the £60bn the EU initially demanded for future commitments you do act as a hapless victim towards the EU.
Even David Davis managed to reduce that charge down to £15bn.
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
I believe Corbyn also wants to restore the 50% top tax rate for those earning more than £150 000 a year
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
I believe Corbyn also wants to restore the 50% top tax rate for those earning more than £150 000 a year
I would hope he would want to restore it to the 60% rate prevalent from 1979 - 1988.
Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage is first out to call for Sir Kim Darroch to be sacked today saying 'From the moment Trump was elected this man was the wrong person to be the British ambassador - a globalist in outlook, totally opposed to the Trump doctrine. 'The comments are wholly unsurprising but for him to speculate about Trump's alleged involvement with Russia shows him to be totally unsuitable for the job and the sooner he is gone the better.'
Former Tory leadership contender and Boris backer Dominic Raab also called Darroch's comments 'unwise'
Whoever leaked the ambassador's emails had an agenda. Either they disapprove of Trump and see the emails as endorsement or they approve of Trump and are out to get the ambassador.
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
I believe Corbyn also wants to restore the 50% top tax rate for those earning more than £150 000 a year
I would hope he would want to restore it to the 60% rate prevalent from 1979 - 1988.
If he is re elected I am sure he would but a 60% top income tax rate would be the highest in the world, even higher than the 58.95% in Aruba and the 57% in Sweden and 55.8% in Denmark.
Nigel Farage is first out to call for Sir Kim Darroch to be sacked calling him 'From the moment Trump was elected this man was the wrong person to be the British ambassador - a globalist in outlook, totally opposed to the Trump doctrine. 'The comments are wholly unsurprising but for him to speculate about Trump's alleged involvement with Russia shows him to be totally unsuitable for the job and the sooner he is gone the better.'
Former Tory leadership contender and Boris backer Dominic Raab also called Darroch's comments 'unwise'
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
It’s certainly been happening when financial decision and are made, and they’re been rumours of it happening unofficially in other policy areas. It’s the natural consequence of a single currency area that has to move towards closer integration to be viable.
Example? I mean, there was Cameron's bunfight over the Fiscal Compact, which only *applied* to the Eurozone, but that was him against the whole EU not just the Eurozone, and he probably wasn't really against it either: He was just grandstanding for domestic consumption, which is why he made all kinds of threats about blocking use of EU institutions then quietly dropped the whole thing once the British news cycle had moved on.
I rolled my eyes when he started with the unhinged nonsense that Theresa May’s deal is Brexit In Name Only. The article deteriorated from there.
He sets out clearly why it is BINO.
The withdrawal agreement and the political declaration place us at the disposal of the EU, which safeguards its privileged access to our market (which it can also offer to others without our consent), keeps us indefinitely under EU jurisdiction directly applicable through UK courts, gives the EU the right to impose fines and trade sanctions and explicitly denies any recourse to international arbitration.
Which is not actually correct. In fact, the WA specifically withdraws us from the jurisdiction of the EU legal system.
So I can only conclude he hasn't read it.
There are two options.
1) Robert Tombs is an idiot.
2) Robert Tombs is not an idiot, knows what he writing is rubbish but is willing to do it anyway for the money and the publicity.
I’m not sure which is worse.
Didn't he also sign that letter about GATT rules which Cash described as the definitive legal ruling on the topic when even a cursory reading of it showed that it was twaddle from start to finish?
Yes, it was him. He ought to stick to medieval history or whatever his speciality is.
Still, writing rubbish for money is very on trend these days. One of its finest proponents is about to become PM. So one can hardly blame Tombs for wanting to join in.
No tinge of bitterness there that your wonderful pieces for pb.com are pro bono.....
None at all. Honoured to have a platform and audience and that they delight.
(Still, if someone wants to shower ££££ in my general direction, feel free. I have an expensive plant habit to support. . )
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
He was just stating the obvious . It’s not his fault it was leaked . I expect Trump will be on the phone to tell Bozo to sack him . And of course the lapdog that is the UK after Brexit will do just that .
I am reading the fire and the fury at the moment, written by an insider, and it has to be said that disfunctional is an understatement. Trump acts like a child with an attention span to match
Nothing in those leaked reports is surprising, or requires any real intelligence to say.
When the British Ambassador, and indeed the Republican heirarchy, need to check Trumps Twitter to see what the latest absurdity is, they know nothing more than Joe Bloggs.
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
I believe Corbyn also wants to restore the 50% top tax rate for those earning more than £150 000 a year
I would hope he would want to restore it to the 60% rate prevalent from 1979 - 1988.
Boris at least has a chance of a majority on that poll and thus passing the Withdrawal Agreement, given Boris voted for the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3, even if the likeliest outcome is Tories largest party under Boris but a Labour, LD and SNP Government for EUref2.
Hunt however would be unable to win a majority and Labour would be the largest party but with Farage holding the balance of power and demanding No Deal as his price given he opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright or else Hunt forced to back EUref2 and a Corbyn minority government in order to keep out Farage
What a silly game putting these polls into seat calculators. If its a brexit GE the amount of vote swapping would be key, and it would be massive.
Fair enough, so let's stick to reminding ourselves that in the only poll so far to ask the question, the Conservatives came from 23% under May to poll 37% with Johnson as leader but only 25% with Hunt. HYUFD is quite entitled to assert that Johnson "at least has a chance of a majority" given such polling and that Hunt clearly has no such chance, "chance" being the key word here. I also agree with you that the amount of vote swapping amongst the Remain side (including Labour) "will be key" to resolving that. However, with both Labour and the LDs polling at similar levels, tthe absence of any national agreement between Labour, the LDs and the Greens will dampen down the effect of tactical voting as will uncertainty over the question of where such tactical votes should be best cast. All that stands in contrast to 2017.
Opinium shows a 10% gap beyween Labour and the Libdems with the latter at 15%. I suspect that an election will polarise opinion and that the LibDems would be lucky to exceed 12% - with the Greens on circa 2% and Labour recovering to circa 35%.
With Corbyn now utterly toxic having achieved the worst leader satisfaction ratings in polling history, I beg to differ.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
If we want to improve the trade balance then we need to increase the savings rate. Excessive consumption is the driver.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
It’s because @another_richard et al do not give a flying f** about economics. They just want the country to suffer.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
If we want to improve the trade balance then we need to increase the savings rate. Excessive consumption is the driver.
Indeed the loosening of fiscal policy to aid Brexit related shocks is likely to further increase that trade deficit.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
He shares an interest with Trump in tax avoidance ?
Of course in Galloway fantasy land, if the Germans had come here in 1940 he'd have been busily undermining the British government in support of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
If we want to improve the trade balance then we need to increase the savings rate. Excessive consumption is the driver.
Have you been talking to RCS again? Savings rates are important but not a magic talisman: it depends what unsaved money is spent on (holidays in Southend or the South of France) and what saved money is invested in (whether your bank uses your deposits to underwrite British entrepreneurs, American startups or BTL mortgages).
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
He shares an interest with Trump in tax avoidance ?
It's a little odd how tickets for the Edgbaston semi-final haven't become available on the official ICC website, when you'd expect that a lot of Indian fans who had bought tickets for the match would now no longer want them given that India are now playing at the Old Trafford semi-final.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
He shares an interest with Trump in tax avoidance ?
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
Because like Trump they see trade as zero sum. What matters is the amount of economic activity you do. What others do is up to them. It's only worth throwing up barriers to trade if you displace exports to domestic consumption more than you reduce the exports. That doesn't happen, for specific reasons. Open economies are successful economies on the whole.
Boris at least has a chance of a majority on that poll and thus passing the Withdrawal Agreement, given Boris voted for the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3, even if the likeliest outcome is Tories largest party under Boris but a Labour, LD and SNP Government for EUref2.
Hunt however would be unable to win a majority and Labour would be the largest party but with Farage holding the balance of power and demanding No Deal as his price given he opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright or else Hunt forced to back EUref2 and a Corbyn minority government in order to keep out Farage
What a silly game putting these polls into seat calculators. If its a brexit GE the amount of vote swapping would be key, and it would be massive.
Fair enough, so let's stick to reminding ourselves that in the only poll so far to ask the question, the Conservatives came from 23% under May to poll 37% with Johnson as leader but only 25% with Hunt. HYUFD is quite entitled to assert that Johnson "at least has a chance of a majority" given such polling and that Hunt clearly has no such chance, "chance" being the key word here. I also agree with you that the amount of vote swapping amongst the Remain side (including Labour) "will be key" to resolving that. However, with both Labour and the LDs polling at similar levels, tthe absence of any national agreement between Labour, the LDs and the Greens will dampen down the effect of tactical voting as will uncertainty over the question of where such tactical votes should be best cast. All that stands in contrast to 2017.
Ashcroft asks the same question
Yes and Ashcroft's poll today has the Tories on 24.5% under Boris with Labour second on 20.7% and the LDs on 19.6% and the Brexit Party down to 16.4% but the Tories only on 22% under Hunt with the Brexit Party second on 20.5% followed by Labour on 19.9% and the LDs on 18.3%.
I am not sure how getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU is surrendering. I guess it boils down to you seeing the UK as some kind of passive, powerless victim that gets things done to it and me seeing it as one of the bigger and more influential voices in a community of 28 countries. We just see the world, and the UK's role and relevance within it, very differently.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
I feel like I am banging my head a gainst a brick wall here. But why does anybody think that our leaving the EU will reduce our trade deficit (except by pushing us into recession and reducing our imports that way)? The increase in tariff and non tariff barriers will hurt our exporters proportionately more than the EU's, because the EU is a far bigger share of our exports. And it's hard to substitute for domestic production when Brexit also damages the supply chain so much here. More likely we just buy more stuff from China. And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus. The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP. I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
It’s because @another_richard et al do not give a flying f** about economics. They just want the country to suffer.
Yet I work for a manufacturing business which exports so I have a certain knowledge about what I'm talking and more 'skin in the game' than most.
Still if you believe its good for the UK to have had 22 years of consecutive trade deficit and no likelihood of things changing then we will inevitably disagree.
But its always fun to see people get upset when establishment groupthink is challenged.
It's a little odd how tickets for the Edgbaston semi-final haven't become available on the official ICC website, when you'd expect that a lot of Indian fans who had bought tickets for the match would now no longer want them given that India are now playing at the Old Trafford semi-final.
At risk of sounding like Norman Tebbitt, who do they cheer for if they still turn up?
Or are they auctioning them off on EBay for four times the price?
Boris at least has a chance of a majority on that poll and thus passing the Withdrawal Agreement, given Boris voted for the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3, even if the likeliest outcome is Tories largest party under Boris but a Labour, LD and SNP Government for EUref2.
Hunt however would be unable to win a majority and Labour would be the largest party but with Farage holding the balance of power and demanding No Deal as his price given he opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright or else Hunt forced to back EUref2 and a Corbyn minority government in order to keep out Farage
What a silly game putting these polls into seat calculators. If its a brexit GE the amount of vote swapping would be key, and it would be massive.
Fair enough, so let's stick to reminding ourselves that in the only poll so far to ask the question, the Conservatives came from 23% under May to poll 37% with Johnson as leader but only 25% with Hunt. HYUFD is quite entitled to assert that Johnson "at least has a chance of a majority" given such polling and that Hunt clearly has no such chance, "chance" being the key word here. I also agree with you that the amount of vote swapping amongst the Remain side (including Labour) "will be key" to resolving that. However, with both Labour and the LDs polling at similar levels, tthe absence of any national agreement between Labour, the LDs and the Greens will dampen down the effect of tactical voting as will uncertainty over the question of where such tactical votes should be best cast. All that stands in contrast to 2017.
Opinium shows a 10% gap beyween Labour and the Libdems with the latter at 15%. I suspect that an election will polarise opinion and that the LibDems would be lucky to exceed 12% - with the Greens on circa 2% and Labour recovering to circa 35%.
With Corbyn now utterly toxic having achieved the worst leader satisfaction ratings in polling history, I beg to differ.
He was toxic in April 2017. Remember the Copeland by election in late February that year?
McDonnell on Marr says the £125k threshold for the gifts tax is probably too low but they are still consulting on it
Why are they even looking at people with only £150,000 of capital?
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
I believe Corbyn also wants to restore the 50% top tax rate for those earning more than £150 000 a year
The UK and USA had top marginal income tax rates of ~70-85% from about the 1930s to the 1980s, i.e. more 'all in this together'.
I perceive that the 40 year Thatcher 'experiment' has been a dismal flop. I wonder what Ken Clarke really thinks, given what he said on AQ.
France and Germany had tamed the unions fairly peacefully by 1979. The UK hadn't, but the policy of capital screwing labour ended up with Brexit and a society more divided than ever.
So a boost to UK exports followed by increased consumption of imports leading to little change on the trade deficit but a bigger reduction in the current account deficit albeit also fading.
I thought he was awful, failed to answer a single question that was asked of him and had nothing of value to say.
Really? That surprises me. IMO he has consistently been the best at explaining Labour's Brexit position. He did a tour de force on this a couple of weeks ago. I think it was on Marr but I'm not 100% on that. Point is, he nailed it. I remember thinking at the time, anybody who has watched this and paid attention and who still claims not to understand Labour's policy must be a bit simple. I will try and find a link for it on YouTube and post on here.
Why the lack of appreciation for Gardiner? I hope I'm wrong about this (and I have no proof of it whatsoever) but I sense it might be because he is Welsh.
EDIT: Except he isn't Welsh. I've just checked his bio - he's Scottish. Born in Glasgow.
Revealing isn't it that the example always given of British influence in the EU is the single market.
Something which was discussed back in the 1980s and given the UK's cumulative trade deficit within the single market perhaps not the best idea in retrospect.
As to expansion of the EU wasn't the UK strategy to have a 'broader' EU rather than a 'deeper' EU and the result was an EU both broader and deeper.
And as I remember Germany was rather keen on the single market and both France and Germany were keen on EU expansion into their traditional areas on interest.
Another UK demand is not having the EU army that Germany wanted. There are more examples.
In any case the point is not about UK influence on the EU; it's about UK influence on decisions that affect the UK. We won't formally have influence after we leave. Turning up to the meetings where the decisions affecting us are made and having a vote are the important differences.
Well the EU army is coming sooner or later, we all know that.
Though it will probably have more generals than tanks.
The UK can no longer prevent it, that is certainly true.
In effect we could never have prevented it, its all part of EverCloserUnion.
Britain has been an enabler of it. The UK could have opted out of the EU Military Service (as Ireland did) but instead they sent a 1* to run the Ops directorate.
Precisely. Therein lies the difficulty of speaking of 'us' within the EU. We are not a united country on this - those in power have consistently made decisions in favour of EU integration, at odds with public wishes and even their own pronouncements. They couldn't play nicely, so the public has now taken their toys away.
Revealing isn't it that the example always given of British influence in the EU is the single market.
Something which was discussed back in the 1980s and given the UK's cumulative trade deficit within the single market perhaps not the best idea in retrospect.
As to expansion of the EU wasn't the UK strategy to have a 'broader' EU rather than a 'deeper' EU and the result was an EU both broader and deeper.
And as I remember Germany was rather keen on the single market and both France and Germany were keen on EU expansion into their traditional areas on interest.
Another UK demand is not having the EU army that Germany wanted. There are more examples.
In any case the point is not about UK influence on the EU; it's about UK influence on decisions that affect the UK. We won't formally have influence after we leave. Turning up to the meetings where the decisions affecting us are made and having a vote are the important differences.
Well the EU army is coming sooner or later, we all know that.
Though it will probably have more generals than tanks.
The UK can no longer prevent it, that is certainly true.
In effect we could never have prevented it, its all part of EverCloserUnion.
Britain has been an enabler of it. The UK could have opted out of the EU Military Service (as Ireland did) but instead they sent a 1* to run the Ops directorate.
Precisely. Therein lies the difficulty of speaking of 'us' within the EU. We are not a united country on this - those in power have consistently made decisions in favour of EU integration, at odds with public wishes and even their own pronouncements. They couldn't play nicely, so the public has now taken their toys away.
So a boost to UK exports followed by increased consumption of imports leading to little change on the trade deficit but a bigger reduction in the current account deficit albeit also fading.
After the mini diplet in 2017, the goods deficit is trending significantly higher in 2019.
The last paragraph, from a woman who knew Johnson during his Bullington Club days, is chilling:
"The characteristics he displayed at Oxford – entitlement, aggression, amorality, lack of concern for others – are still there, dressed up in a contrived, jovial image. It’s a mask to sanitise some ugly features.”
Bad man about to be PM. Not good. Bad, in fact.
That last paragraph is a good summary of Johnson’s character.
Controversially, I would say that *in a PM only* a combination of aggression and amorality is a good thing. Entitlement and la k of concern for others is not
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
So what did Blair get in return for giving up half the Rebate ?
Or what did Cameron get when he claimed he 'halved the bill' but agreed to pay all of it after initially claiming he wouldn't pay any of it ?
And what did Cameron get in his 'renegotiation' ?
Then again we could mention the EU policy on Syrian refugees or Foot and Mouth disease.
Or lets try a hypothetical case - if the UK government said that only 13,000* immigrants would be allowed from the EU annually would the EU allow it ?
That's the reality - that may well be better than the alternatives but lets not deny it exists.
* The number the government predicted would be the maximum annual immigration.
The reality is that all countries do not get all they want in an organisation in which sovereignty is voluntarily pooled. The UK was the 5th biggest economy in the world, that we got any rebate at all is pretty extraordinary. Do you think the Germans and the French were happy about that? We were able to opt out of Schengen and the single currency. Again, were the Germans and the French delighted about this? I would be very surprised if that were the case. The Spanish had to accept Gibraltar being an integral part of the Single Market and Customs Union. They did not like that. I am afraid I just do not see us in the EU as hapless victims, powerless to prevent others from continuously shitting all over us.
So you cannot provide answers to any of the examples I gave ?
In other words not 'getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU'.
And regarding the Rebate, how was it gained in the 1980s ? By Thatcher playing hardball and threatening to bring things to a stop.
Not something our politicians have done since. Perhaps if they had done so a few times things would have developed differently.
Plus Gibraltar is not part of the Customs Union, in fact I believe it has a similar status to Ceuta and Melilla so I'm not seeing the great victory you seem to think exists there.
And given that you were willing to agree to the £60bn the EU initially demanded for future commitments you do act as a hapless victim towards the EU.
Even David Davis managed to reduce that charge down to £15bn.
If UK politicians are crap that is not the EU’s fault, while you might want to ask the people of Gibraltar about the benefits of EU membership. The ongoing uncertainty over Brexit has cost the UK far more than £60bn. As I say, you see the UK as a helpless victim, unable to prevent others causing it harm, while I don’t. We have different world views.
I thought he was awful, failed to answer a single question that was asked of him and had nothing of value to say.
Really? That surprises me. IMO he has consistently been the best at explaining Labour's Brexit position. He did a tour de force on this a couple of weeks ago. I think it was on Marr but I'm not 100% on that. Point is, he nailed it. I remember thinking at the time, anybody who has watched this and paid attention and who still claims not to understand Labour's policy must be a bit simple. I will try and find a link for it on YouTube and post on here.
Why the lack of appreciation for Gardiner? I hope I'm wrong about this (and I have no proof of it whatsoever) but I sense it might be because he is Welsh.
EDIT: Except he isn't Welsh. I've just checked his bio - he's Scottish. Born in Glasgow.
When asked would there be a second referendum on any deal with remain on the ballot paper and would labour campaign for remain we got lost in clause five meeting to formulate manifesto. It’s only a few weeks since he said labour were no longer the party of remain. If his job was to confuse he did excellently.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
Yes, Ken C must have made a lot of people feel he was the best PM we never had.
I agree with you, but like suggesting that social care has to be paid for and getting hammered with "death tax"/"dementia tax", any suggestion that you'll put taxes up has the media reaching for their hyperbole. The widely-held belief that inheritance tax is "hated" (I'm admittedly not sure how true this is) is another example - the tax affects a tiny sliver of the population, but the press have persuaded loads of people that it's all about them.
Conversely, when Gordon tried to prove his centrist credentials by reducing income tax he got absolutely no applause for it. I never met a single voter who expressed any interest or pleasure in it.
I thought he was awful, failed to answer a single question that was asked of him and had nothing of value to say.
Really? That surprises me. IMO he has consistently been the best at explaining Labour's Brexit position. He did a tour de force on this a couple of weeks ago. I think it was on Marr but I'm not 100% on that. Point is, he nailed it. I remember thinking at the time, anybody who has watched this and paid attention and who still claims not to understand Labour's policy must be a bit simple. I will try and find a link for it on YouTube and post on here.
Why the lack of appreciation for Gardiner? I hope I'm wrong about this (and I have no proof of it whatsoever) but I sense it might be because he is Welsh.
EDIT: Except he isn't Welsh. I've just checked his bio - he's Scottish. Born in Glasgow.
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
Mouthy businessman with carefully planned tax strategy... what do you think he might have in common with Lord Ashcroft?
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Should add - nothing made me feel more European than living in America. People who think Brexit means having a better relationship with the US are in for the rudest of all awakenings.
The last paragraph, from a woman who knew Johnson during his Bullington Club days, is chilling:
"The characteristics he displayed at Oxford – entitlement, aggression, amorality, lack of concern for others – are still there, dressed up in a contrived, jovial image. It’s a mask to sanitise some ugly features.”
Bad man about to be PM. Not good. Bad, in fact.
That last paragraph is a good summary of Johnson’s character.
Controversially, I would say that *in a PM only* a combination of aggression and amorality is a good thing. Entitlement and la k of concern for others is not
That is controversial. I think I understand what you mean but I am not sure I agree completely. And taken together with his other character flaws I think they are a frightening combination.
Talking of Ashcroft, please could PM Boris replace Sir Kim Darroch with Lord Ashcroft as UK Ambassador to Washington given Darroch's diplomatic disaster today
Why do you say that it was Darroch's diplomatic disaster? It was a UK diplomatic disaster, sure, but his job is (in confidence) to relay back to the Government the situation as he finds it. He can't make stuff up just in case it gets leaked - he would be grossly failing in his job were he to so do.
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
Mouthy businessman with carefully planned tax strategy... what do you think he might have in common with Lord Ashcroft?
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
Yes, Ken C must have made a lot of people feel he was the best PM we never had.
I agree with you, but like suggesting that social care has to be paid for and getting hammered with "death tax"/"dementia tax", any suggestion that you'll put taxes up has the media reaching for their hyperbole. The widely-held belief that inheritance tax is "hated" (I'm admittedly not sure how true this is) is another example - the tax affects a tiny sliver of the population, but the press have persuaded loads of people that it's all about them.
Conversely, when Gordon tried to prove his centrist credentials by reducing income tax he got absolutely no applause for it. I never met a single voter who expressed any interest or pleasure in it.
Because Gordon Brown's was a con people saw through. Reducing income tax while putting up 2% in National Insurance is not a reduction.
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Should add - nothing made me feel more European than living in America. People who think Brexit means having a better relationship with the US are in for the rudest of all awakenings.
Yes, I lived in the USA for 5 years as a teenager. The common language and familiarity of US television and film conceals a chasm of difference on cultural values.
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Should add - nothing made me feel more European than living in America. People who think Brexit means having a better relationship with the US are in for the rudest of all awakenings.
Totally this - the US is the only place I ever feel European, as opposed to British or English. It is incredibly disconcerting in being very familiar to look at, but so very different in the way it is organised and how people relate to each other and the world. I used to love going there. I find it a lot more challenging now Trump is in charge.
When asked would there be a second referendum on any deal with remain on the ballot paper and would labour campaign for remain we got lost in clause five meeting to formulate manifesto. It’s only a few weeks since he said labour were no longer the party of remain. If his job was to confuse he did excellently.
He can't say if Labour would campaign full on for Remain because they haven't decided that yet.
The main point that I think he gets over well is that Ref2 and GE are not alternatives but rather are (and must be) coupled.
Ref2 (with Remain on the ballot) is not possible in this parliament regardless of what Labour policy is. To deliver it Labour must move from opposition to government. Therefore their primary goal must be to force a GE. If they succeed in this and then win it with Ref2 in the manifesto we get Ref2 and the opportunity to cancel Brexit.
I can't see any other realistic route to that destination.
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Should add - nothing made me feel more European than living in America. People who think Brexit means having a better relationship with the US are in for the rudest of all awakenings.
Totally this - the US is the only place I ever feel European, as opposed to British or English. It is incredibly disconcerting in being very familiar to look at, but so very different in the way it is organised and how people relate to each other and the world. I used to love going there. I find it a lot more challenging now Trump is in charge.
As the saying goes, two nations divided by a common language...
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
A 6-point margin compared with, say, Warren, isn't bad given that socialism has an recent years been seen in the US as thoroughly weird, like flat earthism. That's a view held by some here, of course, but it's unremarkable to say one's a socialist, whereas in the US it has been really unusual for decades.
I think that you are falling behind the times. 40% of Americans prefer Socialism over Capitalism.
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
+1. I lived there for a while. It is home to some of the best people in the world and also some of the worst. They just do everything with more umph than we do. I loved their can do attitude and the sense of endless possibility but found their lack of empathy for each other disconcerting. Loved the place but ended up happy to come home to our familiar, frustrated little island. Although both countries seem to have gone a bit nuts recently.
Should add - nothing made me feel more European than living in America. People who think Brexit means having a better relationship with the US are in for the rudest of all awakenings.
Yes, I lived in the USA for 5 years as a teenager. The common language and familiarity of US television and film conceals a chasm of difference on cultural values.
We are closer to Canada, New Zealand and Australia than we are to either continental Europe or the USA culturally and we share the same Head of State
So you cannot provide answers to any of the examples I gave ?
In other words not 'getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU'.
And regarding the Rebate, how was it gained in the 1980s ? By Thatcher playing hardball and threatening to bring things to a stop.
Not something our politicians have done since. Perhaps if they had done so a few times things would have developed differently.
Plus Gibraltar is not part of the Customs Union, in fact I believe it has a similar status to Ceuta and Melilla so I'm not seeing the great victory you seem to think exists there.
And given that you were willing to agree to the £60bn the EU initially demanded for future commitments you do act as a hapless victim towards the EU.
Even David Davis managed to reduce that charge down to £15bn.
If UK politicians are crap that is not the EU’s fault, while you might want to ask the people of Gibraltar about the benefits of EU membership. The ongoing uncertainty over Brexit has cost the UK far more than £60bn. As I say, you see the UK as a helpless victim, unable to prevent others causing it harm, while I don’t. We have different world views.
So you were wrong about Gibraltar and are now blustering.
And you were wrong about about the £60bn and are now blustering.
Just as you were wrong about other things earlier in the day.
But we do have different views - you are an EU fanboy and lack any modicum of scepticism or doubt about it.
Its that sort of fan boy cultural cringe you exhibit which leads to you having been proved wrong about the £60bn and leads to you being so surprised that Thatcher was able to gain the Rebate and then so accepting that Blair gave half of it away for nothing in return.
My advice is to have a more open mind and do some research - finding things out for yourself can be rather liberating and you might even discover that the world comes in shades of grey rather than being either black or white.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48898231
And what qualifications has Lord Ashcroft got to be US ambassador?
The Corbyn project was always doomed and not, as many of his supporters would like to think, because he faced a hostile media. It was doomed because the man at its head is a crank. And a thoroughly unpleasant one, at that."
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/euan-mccolm-when-jeremy-corbyn-goes-so-must-his-loony-left-lieutenants-1-4960567
The top 0.1%, or 1%, would be a more sensible area to focus on for at least their first parliament. More or Less/R4 reported some time ago that a higher marginal income tax on only incomes >£150,000/yr would raise £22,000,000,000/yr. I don't know what a focus on similar people could raise in capital taxes.
Ken Clarke has seen the light and said on the last AQ that a Scandinavian welfare state would be quite attractive, as long as he clearly implied, the people setting tax policy were numerate. That's a big reservation, unfortunately. However, tax is the price of a civilised society so WTF don't centrist and left-wing politicians say so instead of leaving the field to the small state/flat tax loons?
Question is who is leaking and why? Something to do with Farage?
He got an increase in the UK's net trade deficit with the EU from 0.5% of GDP in 1999 to 4% in the year we decided to leave. That's important in the context of budget contributions because although Germany are the largest net contributor to the EU budget they at least have a huge net internal trade surplus to show for it, the opposite of the position of the UK as the 2nd largest net contributor.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
When the EEC was created, Germany essentially agreed to subsidise French agriculture in return for the French opening up their market to German manufactured goods. Heath in his desperation to join was prepared for the UK to subsidise French agriculture as in addition for the UK to open up our market to German manufactured goods. Not a good deal then, and given the widening trade deficit and rising UK contributions an even worse deal now.
(Still, if someone wants to shower ££££ in my general direction, feel free. I have an expensive plant habit to support.
Redwood: "My conclusion is that a determined Prime Minister can get us out."
https://brexitcentral.com/a-determined-prime-minister-can-ensure-we-are-out-of-the-eu-by-31st-october/
NATO obviously isn't going to survive in its current form and most of Europe (including the UK) gets this.
To return to the original point, that's the practical difference between joint decision making and rule taking. I can see why Leavers don't want rule taking. But if we are part of the EU system, as the only probable Brexit end state, is it better to refuse any role in making those decisions?
https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/1147830234915454976
Ashcroft has strong ties to the US, is intelligent, has a business background and extensive connections in the US and would be an Ambassador who believes in Brexit and is not anti Trump
In other words not 'getting almost everything we wanted out of the EU'.
And regarding the Rebate, how was it gained in the 1980s ? By Thatcher playing hardball and threatening to bring things to a stop.
Not something our politicians have done since. Perhaps if they had done so a few times things would have developed differently.
Plus Gibraltar is not part of the Customs Union, in fact I believe it has a similar status to Ceuta and Melilla so I'm not seeing the great victory you seem to think exists there.
And given that you were willing to agree to the £60bn the EU initially demanded for future commitments you do act as a hapless victim towards the EU.
Even David Davis managed to reduce that charge down to £15bn.
'The comments are wholly unsurprising but for him to speculate about Trump's alleged involvement with Russia shows him to be totally unsuitable for the job and the sooner he is gone the better.'
Former Tory leadership contender and Boris backer Dominic Raab also called Darroch's comments 'unwise'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7221361/Nigel-Farage-demands-Britains-man-Washington-sacked-amid-leaked-memos-row.html
I suspect the second.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates
And the impact of leaving the single market will be particularly bad for services, where we run a surplus.
The fact that leaving the EU is a negative for our balance of payments should be obvious from the effect it has had on GBP.
I have noticed a weird resurgence in mercantilist nonsense on trade recently. I blame Trump.
When the British Ambassador, and indeed the Republican heirarchy, need to check Trumps Twitter to see what the latest absurdity is, they know nothing more than Joe Bloggs.
If you don't have facts, argue the law.
If you don't have the facts or the law, argue the personality.
If you don't have the facts, the law or the personality - probably better to keep quiet, or you end up looking like an idiot.
Which - in case you wondered - you certainly did with that overtly xenophobic and entirely wrong comment.
It's a little odd how tickets for the Edgbaston semi-final haven't become available on the official ICC website, when you'd expect that a lot of Indian fans who had bought tickets for the match would now no longer want them given that India are now playing at the Old Trafford semi-final.
https://twitter.com/adamrangpr/status/1147756183526264832
Still if you believe its good for the UK to have had 22 years of consecutive trade deficit and no likelihood of things changing then we will inevitably disagree.
But its always fun to see people get upset when establishment groupthink is challenged.
Or are they auctioning them off on EBay for four times the price?
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451859-trump-trails-biden-by-10-points-in-new-poll
Notable that the ‘generic Democrat whom you regard as a socialist’ is losing to Trump.
I perceive that the 40 year Thatcher 'experiment' has been a dismal flop. I wonder what Ken Clarke really thinks, given what he said on AQ.
France and Germany had tamed the unions fairly peacefully by 1979. The UK hadn't, but the policy of capital screwing labour ended up with Brexit and a society more divided than ever.
But in the reality based world the numbers exist and matter.
The UK's trade balance as a percentage of GDP was:
2013 -1.6%
2014 -1.6%
2015 -1.4%
2016 -1.6%
2017 -1.2%
2018 -1.5%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/d28l/pnbp
Or on the wider current account balance as a percentage of GDP:
2013 -5.1%
2014 -4.9%
2015 -4.9%
2016 -5.2%
2017 -3.3%
2018 -3.9%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/aa6h/ukea
So a boost to UK exports followed by increased consumption of imports leading to little change on the trade deficit but a bigger reduction in the current account deficit albeit also fading.
Why the lack of appreciation for Gardiner? I hope I'm wrong about this (and I have no proof of it whatsoever) but I sense it might be because he is Welsh.
EDIT: Except he isn't Welsh. I've just checked his bio - he's Scottish. Born in Glasgow.
Quite an interesting CV he has.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Gardiner
Have fun PBers and remember to enjoy the nice weather while we still have it.
Controversially, I would say that *in a PM only* a combination of aggression and amorality is a good thing. Entitlement and la k of concern for others is not
I agree with you, but like suggesting that social care has to be paid for and getting hammered with "death tax"/"dementia tax", any suggestion that you'll put taxes up has the media reaching for their hyperbole. The widely-held belief that inheritance tax is "hated" (I'm admittedly not sure how true this is) is another example - the tax affects a tiny sliver of the population, but the press have persuaded loads of people that it's all about them.
Conversely, when Gordon tried to prove his centrist credentials by reducing income tax he got absolutely no applause for it. I never met a single voter who expressed any interest or pleasure in it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/10/america-socialism-capitalism-poll-axios
America is such a diverse place that it is impossible to hate it entirely. There are good people there amongst the numpties.
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1147759251407941632?s=19
NEW THREAD
The main point that I think he gets over well is that Ref2 and GE are not alternatives but rather are (and must be) coupled.
Ref2 (with Remain on the ballot) is not possible in this parliament regardless of what Labour policy is. To deliver it Labour must move from opposition to government. Therefore their primary goal must be to force a GE. If they succeed in this and then win it with Ref2 in the manifesto we get Ref2 and the opportunity to cancel Brexit.
I can't see any other realistic route to that destination.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/07/the-midas-touch-living-in-a-world-of-abundant-knowledge/
And you were wrong about about the £60bn and are now blustering.
Just as you were wrong about other things earlier in the day.
But we do have different views - you are an EU fanboy and lack any modicum of scepticism or doubt about it.
Its that sort of fan boy cultural cringe you exhibit which leads to you having been proved wrong about the £60bn and leads to you being so surprised that Thatcher was able to gain the Rebate and then so accepting that Blair gave half of it away for nothing in return.
My advice is to have a more open mind and do some research - finding things out for yourself can be rather liberating and you might even discover that the world comes in shades of grey rather than being either black or white.