We were told not to believe the break-up of the UK would happen. Project fear they called it! Looks like an independent Scotland is one step closer....
McDonnell's comments make no difference to the Union at all, however they may bring the end of Scottish Labour much closer given Ian Murray's comments tonight open the way to SLab civil war tonight and as Davidson and Swinson and Sturgeon feed off the carcass
Sturgeon, Rennie and Harvie will all benefit if SLab goes into full civil war mode, but hardly Davidson. She’s a dead duck.
Far from it, Davidson has a higher approval rating than Rennie and Leonard in the Ashcroft poll amongst Scots
How’s that going to help her pick up SLab supporters? Generally speaking SLabbers despise the Tories. All the more right now. Even Tories despise Tories.
More may go LD but most SLab voters are still Unionists (60% with Ashcroft) and some of them would vote Tory over SNP
And plenty will go SNP and Green. I’m struggling to see how that results in FM Ruth.
No, she's a normal politician doing normal politics. Nobody can do anything until parliament returns, so for the time being you leave your opponents guessing.
It's depressing that it's come to this but yeah, I'm all aboard the IndyRef2 train. Choo Choo, departing Daily Mail island, destination: anywhere but fucking here.
The irony that the Conservative and Unionist Party have destroyed the Union more effectively than any effort of the Scottish National Party.
The Scottish nationalists always said it would be the English who broke the union not the Scots. I listen to the radio and no longer understand the English and their wish to throw away everything they have including the support of the Scottish.
Only 46% of Scots back independence even on the Ashcroft poll once Don't Knows are included, that is only 1% more than the 45% Yes got in 2014. Brexit has not made that much difference to the Union other than making a few more Unionists shift to undecided
By your arithmetic, the NO vote has dropped from 55% to 43%.
Jofra Archer: Ashes hopeful takes 6-27 and hits century for Sussex second XI
I have a feeling he might be playing in the 2nd test...
Along with bringing in Archer, I'd drop Ali for Leach, and probably give Buttler the gloves too. Dominic Sibley looks an interesting prospect, bring him in for the woefully out of form (In test format) Bairstow. Roy opening is an interesting proposition, if it works in a match we can get a long way ahead of the game. I'd give him more chances.
Joe denly has to go. Not good enough nor one for the future. As an ozzie friend said to me the other day, what is it with you poms picking these bits and pieces players.
It isn't entirely clear that Archer is 100% fit for a five day Test Match and after the Anderson fiasco the Selectors may be reluctant to take any more chances. I'm not sure Woakes is fully fit either, so the same considerations apply to him. As it happens there are plenty of decent quick bowlers around at the moment so the Selectors do have options if there are any fitness doubts about the obvious choices. As Lords is a 'result' wicket and tends to help classic Englisg swing bowling they do not have to go for a maximum pace attack and can probably afford to rest Archer and/or Woakes if they wish to be cautious. As ever though, their thinking is likely to remain opaque before, during and after the match.
I wouldn't have picked Denley for the first Test, nor moved Root to three, but you have to give the experiment another go now. You can't just drop it after one losing game, especially as it was far from the biggest problem.
The Roy experiment is worth another shot if only because of the lack of decent alternatives.
Ali and Bairstow both have to go because of loss of form. Why not bring back Foakes? He's a much better wicketkeeper and a strong batsmen who has shown he has the technique and temperament for Test Cricket..
Jos Buttler averages 33 in first class cricket, in which he has scored one century in the last five years.
Who do you replace him with? The Selectors don't seem to take much notice of County Championship form, which is kind of understandable considering how few games are played and the fragmented nature of the competition. Success in the short-form of the game seems the best route through to the Test Side now....which kind of brings you back to Buttler.
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
.
Even if unemployment spiked by 200 000 that would be barely a fifth of the 1.2 million it rose by in 2008, a rise in savings may also be no bad thing.
So all the scare stories not producing Armageddon will only benefit the Tories and Leavers even more
And this is why political opponents find it easy to portray Tories as callous
You voted for Leave not me, you won it putting sovereignty ahead of economics, you own it
I would never ever say that 200,000 unemployed is “a price worth paying” or anything close
What's your number then Charles?
What's the cut off point for worth it/not worth it?
It’s a silly question, because brexit is not about what happens in short term shocks and adjustment, but what happens in medium and long term.
There is no measurement of brexit impact on UK in medium or long term, too many other variables. In that time we transform from industrial to post industrial. Robotics and automation makes a huge impact. Increased globalisation where in some sectors we cannot compete with wages 8x cheaper than here and container ships and Silk Road bringing goods here, nor the increase in providing services more cheaply from other side of world. UK workers set upon a difficult downward spiral of job type, reskilling and learning, pay, conditions, pension cost, whether we brexit or not.
Also worth adding that if parliament does try to do a GoNAfaE, there's a game of chicken to be played between Corbyn, who probably wants the job (it would boost his status and make him look serious and statesmanlike) and Tory rebels / LDs who would prefer literally anybody else. Each side will want to make it look like the other option is impossible.
Fuel strike 2000 is an interesting example. It is comparable to what No Deal will be like, temporary disruption.
If there is a temporary disruption people get over it. How did Blair do in the 2001 election?
Well, it was very temporary and very little disruption.
If disruption from no deal is, say, a couple of orders of magnitude more extensive and lasts a couple of magnitudes longer, then the consequent political impact might be expected to be similarly greater.
The take out from the comparison is people hurt and disadvantaged unnecessarily, due to stockpiling, greedily rushing out and over buying. Silly consumer behaviour could easily undo good contingency planning, and pain and ugliness be the result of that.
You can anticipate public panic in such a scenario. Therefore so can the contingency planners. Perhaps they should plan for it?
No deal has gone down and it’s kicking off. There’s one watermelon left in the store and five people clinging to it, these are an old, old crippled grandfather, a mentally handicapped person in a wheelchair, an overweight woman on welfare with a sniffling, whimpering baby, a young, white doctor with blue eyes and perfect teeth and Taylor Swift. What does the contingency plan say?
Trump trailing Biden and Sanders but leading O'Rourke in Texas - that really can't be lack of name recognition. Polls generally confusing on Sanders vs Warren, but otherwise still steady Biden lead:
It's depressing that it's come to this but yeah, I'm all aboard the IndyRef2 train. Choo Choo, departing Daily Mail island, destination: anywhere but fucking here.
The irony that the Conservative and Unionist Party have destroyed the Union more effectively than any effort of the Scottish National Party.
The Scottish nationalists always said it would be the English who broke the union not the Scots. I listen to the radio and no longer understand the English and their wish to throw away everything they have including the support of the Scottish.
Only 46% of Scots back independence even on the Ashcroft poll once Don't Knows are included, that is only 1% more than the 45% Yes got in 2014. Brexit has not made that much difference to the Union other than making a few more Unionists shift to undecided
By your arithmetic, the NO vote has dropped from 55% to 43%.
You misunderstand. HY uses polling to support his viewpoint, not to ascertain moves in public opinion. He sees what he wants to see. Nothing more, nothing less.
Jofra Archer: Ashes hopeful takes 6-27 and hits century for Sussex second XI
I have a feeling he might be playing in the 2nd test...
Along with bringing in Archer, I'd drop Ali for Leach, and probably give Buttler the gloves too. Dominic Sibley looks an interesting prospect, bring him in for the woefully out of form (In test format) Bairstow. Roy opening is an interesting proposition, if it works in a match we can get a long way ahead of the game. I'd give him more chances.
Joe denly has to go. Not good enough nor one for the future. As an ozzie friend said to me the other day, what is it with you poms picking these bits and pieces players.
It isn't entirely clear that Archer is 100% fit for a five day Test Match and after the Anderson fiasco the Selectors may be reluctant to take any more chances. I'm not sure Woakes is fully fit either, so the same considerations apply to him. As it happens there are plenty of decent quick bowlers around at the moment so the Selectors do have options if there are any fitness doubts about the obvious choices. As Lords is a 'result' wicket and tends to help classic Englisg swing bowling they do not have to go for a maximum pace attack and can probably afford to rest Archer and/or Woakes if they wish to be cautious. As ever though, their thinking is likely to remain opaque before, during and after the match.
I wouldn't have picked Denley for the first Test, nor moved Root to three, but you have to give the experiment another go now. You can't just drop it after one losing game, especially as it was far from the biggest problem.
The Roy experiment is worth another shot if only because of the lack of decent alternatives.
Ali and Bairstow both have to go because of loss of form. Why not bring back Foakes? He's a much better wicketkeeper and a strong batsmen who has shown he has the technique and temperament for Test Cricket..
Jos Buttler averages 33 in first class cricket, in which he has scored one century in the last five years.
Jos Buttler wasn't brought back into the Test team last summer because of his record in First Class cricket, so it's absurd to use that to criticise him now.
In the seven home Tests last year he scored 510 runs at an average of 46.36. I think that makes his selection a success and worth persisting with.
Sam Northeast 2019 avg 62 Career avg 39 Dominic Sibley 2019 avg 62 Career avg 39 Ravi Bopara 2019 avg 58 Career avg 40 Gary Ballance 2019 avg 56 Career avg 48
Jofra Archer: Ashes hopeful takes 6-27 and hits century for Sussex second XI
I have a feeling he might be playing in the 2nd test...
Along with bringing in Archer, I'd drop Ali for Leach, and probably give Buttler the gloves too. Dominic Sibley looks an interesting prospect, bring him in for the woefully out of form (In test format) Bairstow. Roy opening is an interesting proposition, if it works in a match we can get a long way ahead of the game. I'd give him more chances.
Joe denly has to go. Not good enough nor one for the future. As an ozzie friend said to me the other day, what is it with you poms picking these bits and pieces players.
It isn't entirely clear that Archer is 100% fit for a five day Test Match and after the Anderson fiasco the Selectors may be reluctant to take any more chances. I'm not sure Woakes is fully fit either, so the same considerations apply to him. As it happens there are plenty of decent quick bowlers around at the moment so the Selectors do have options if there are any fitness doubts about the obvious choices. As Lords is a 'result' wicket and tends to help classic Englisg swing bowling they do not have to go for a maximum pace attack and can probably afford to rest Archer and/or Woakes if they wish to be cautious. As ever though, their thinking is likely to remain opaque before, during and after the match.
I wouldn't have picked Denley for the first Test, nor moved Root to three, but you have to give the experiment another go now. You can't just drop it after one losing game, especially as it was far from the biggest problem.
The Roy experiment is worth another shot if only because of the lack of decent alternatives.
Ali and Bairstow both have to go because of loss of form. Why not bring back Foakes? He's a much better wicketkeeper and a strong batsmen who has shown he has the technique and temperament for Test Cricket..
Jos Buttler averages 33 in first class cricket, in which he has scored one century in the last five years.
Who do you replace him with? The Selectors don't seem to take much notice of County Championship form, which is kind of understandable considering how few games are played and the fragmented nature of the competition. Success in the short-form of the game seems the best route through to the Test Side now....which kind of brings you back to Buttler.
And that's the problem - batting for 20 overs in a ODI with the field spread to all corners requires a different skillset to a test match against attacking bowlers with hours to spare.
It's depressing that it's come to this but yeah, I'm all aboard the IndyRef2 train. Choo Choo, departing Daily Mail island, destination: anywhere but fucking here.
The irony that the Conservative and Unionist Party have destroyed the Union more effectively than any effort of the Scottish National Party.
The Scottish nationalists always said it would be the English who broke the union not the Scots. I listen to the radio and no longer understand the English and their wish to throw away everything they have including the support of the Scottish.
Only 46% of Scots back independence even on the Ashcroft poll once Don't Knows are included, that is only 1% more than the 45% Yes got in 2014. Brexit has not made that much difference to the Union other than making a few more Unionists shift to undecided
By your arithmetic, the NO vote has dropped from 55% to 43%.
Yes, as I said some Remainer Unionists have moved from No to Don't Know but they have not moved to Yes either
Jofra Archer: Ashes hopeful takes 6-27 and hits century for Sussex second XI
I have a feeling he might be playing in the 2nd test...
Along with bringing in Archer, I'd drop Ali for Leach, and probably give Buttler the gloves too. Dominic Sibley looks an interesting prospect, bring him in for the woefully out of form (In test format) Bairstow. Roy opening is an interesting proposition, if it works in a match we can get a long way ahead of the game. I'd give him more chances.
Joe denly has to go. Not good enough nor one for the future. As an ozzie friend said to me the other day, what is it with you poms picking these bits and pieces players.
It isn't entirely clear that Archer is 100% fit for a five day Test Match and after the Anderson fiasco the Selectors may be reluctant to take any more chances. I'm not sure Woakes is fully fit either, so the same considerations apply to him. As it happens there are plenty of decent quick bowlers around at the moment so the Selectors do have options if there are any fitness doubts about the obvious choices. As Lords is a 'result' wicket and tends to help classic Englisg swing bowling they do not have to go for a maximum pace attack and can probably afford to rest Archer and/or Woakes if they wish to be cautious. As ever though, their thinking is likely to remain opaque before, during and after the match.
I wouldn't have picked Denley for the first Test, nor moved Root to three, but you have to give the experiment another go now. You can't just drop it after one losing game, especially as it was far from the biggest problem.
The Roy experiment is worth another shot if only because of the lack of decent alternatives.
Ali and Bairstow both have to go because of loss of form. Why not bring back Foakes? He's a much better wicketkeeper and a strong batsmen who has shown he has the technique and temperament for Test Cricket..
Jos Buttler averages 33 in first class cricket, in which he has scored one century in the last five years.
Jos Buttler wasn't brought back into the Test team last summer because of his record in First Class cricket, so it's absurd to use that to criticise him now.
In the seven home Tests last year he scored 510 runs at an average of 46.36. I think that makes his selection a success and worth persisting with.
It isn't absurd if you think an England team should be capable of batting a whole day to save a match.
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Because if they didn't, then in a PR system England would probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Let's see how well that stacks up after a catastrophic No Deal exit shall we?
Tic toc, tic toc.
First any referendum would cause damage due to uncertainty, then we were waiting for the referendum result, the invocation of Article 50. Now it's actual exit.
Once we have exited and the sky doesn't fall what will it be then?
You're looking forward to a No Deal exit are you?
Originally no not at all. Now, yes absolutely.
It's like looking forward to Guy Fawkes Night, let's see the fireworks.
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Because if they didn't, then in a PR system England would probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Let's see how well that stacks up after a catastrophic No Deal exit shall we?
Honestly, interesting as this kind of polling is, it is irrelevant to what will really happen at end of October.
If there are empty shelves, fuel problems, panic buying, meds issues etc etc then all these people now declaring they will back Boris and his No Deal is for the birds.
Fuel strike. Tony Blair. Early 2000s.
There won't be, the Government is now fully preparing for No Deal Brexit so any significant effects won't be felt for months. Plus given the apocalyptic warnings about No Deal if people have not died of starvation after the first week they will be wondering what the fuss was about.
Leavers are now fully behind getting Brexit done and No Deal and with the Remain vote split between Labour and LD Boris wins
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
The real risk to the UK economy from No Deal is that a confidence shock means consumers become more cautious, means that the savings rate increases, and we enter a negative feedback loop.
With interest rates currently at 0.75%, there is very little the government can do in the way of monetary stimulus to reverse a cycle like that.
If the worst thing that occurs is the UK's desperately low savings rate increases is that awful?
Jos Buttler averages 33 in first class cricket, in which he has scored one century in the last five years.
Jos Buttler wasn't brought back into the Test team last summer because of his record in First Class cricket, so it's absurd to use that to criticise him now.
In the seven home Tests last year he scored 510 runs at an average of 46.36. I think that makes his selection a success and worth persisting with.
It isn't absurd if you think an England team should be capable of batting a whole day to save a match.
The players above Buttler in the Test batting averages for England in the last 12 months are Woakes, Cook and Foakes (min 200 runs). Buttler is currently the strongest link in the England top 8. Buttler is not the problem.
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Because if they didn't, then in a PR system England would probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Let's see how well that stacks up after a catastrophic No Deal exit shall we?
Honestly, interesting as this kind of polling is, it is irrelevant to what will really happen at end of October.
If there are empty shelves, fuel problems, panic buying, meds issues etc etc then all these people now declaring they will back Boris and his No Deal is for the birds.
Fuel strike. Tony Blair. Early 2000s.
There won't be, the Government is now fully preparing for No Deal Brexit so any significant effects won't be felt for months. Plus given the apocalyptic warnings about No Deal if people have not died of starvation after the first week they will be wondering what the fuss was about.
Leavers are now fully behind getting Brexit done and No Deal and with the Remain vote split between Labour and LD Boris wins
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
The real risk to the UK economy from No Deal is that a confidence shock means consumers become more cautious, means that the savings rate increases, and we enter a negative feedback loop.
With interest rates currently at 0.75%, there is very little the government can do in the way of monetary stimulus to reverse a cycle like that.
If the worst thing that occurs is the UK's desperately low savings rate increases is that awful?
It is a very strange position for Robert to take given how many times he has been on here lecturing us about how UK savings rates are far too low and the secret to a successful economy is higher savings rates.
I believe he even made one of his videos about it.
It is quite pathetic it is left to Remainers who respect democracy like me to deliver the platform you voted for because you and Charles cannot face the consequences of your Leave vote
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Because if they didn't, then in a PR system England would probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Let's see how well that stacks up after a catastrophic No Deal exit shall we?
Honestly, interesting as this kind of polling is, it is irrelevant to what will really happen at end of October.
If there are empty shelves, fuel problems, panic buying, meds issues etc etc then all these people now declaring they will back Boris and his No Deal is for the birds.
Fuel strike. Tony Blair. Early 2000s.
There won't be, the Government is now fully preparing for No Deal Brexit so any significant effects won't be felt for months. Plus given the apocalyptic warnings about No Deal if people have not died of starvation after the first week they will be wondering what the fuss was about.
Leavers are now fully behind getting Brexit done and No Deal and with the Remain vote split between Labour and LD Boris wins
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
The real risk to the UK economy from No Deal is that a confidence shock means consumers become more cautious, means that the savings rate increases, and we enter a negative feedback loop.
With interest rates currently at 0.75%, there is very little the government can do in the way of monetary stimulus to reverse a cycle like that.
If the worst thing that occurs is the UK's desperately low savings rate increases is that awful?
It is a very strange position for Robert to take given how many times he has been on here lecturing us about how UK savings rates are far too low and the secret to a successful economy is higher savings rates.
I believe he even made one of his videos about it.
I would rather the savings rate increased in a measured way, over four or five years, than all in a rush.
"Oil prices will need to trade at around $9 to $10 per barrel in the long run if gasoline is going to be able to compete with electric vehicles and renewable energy.
That startling conclusion comes from BNP Paribas, which warned in a new report that crude oil is facing an existential and likely mortal threat from renewable energy and EVs."
It is quite pathetic it is left to Remainers who respect democracy like me to deliver the platform you voted for because you and Charles cannot face the consequences of your Leave vote
It is pathethic that I point out facts to you?
I'm struggling to understand your point.
The Leave campaign was based on regaining sovereignty, ending free movement and doing our own trade deals. You voted for that platform and now complain when it is implemented
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Even after Scotland departs and rejoins the EU, and Ireland reunites, England must not under any circumstances have anything resembling representative democracy...
It is a very strange position for Robert to take given how many times he has been on here lecturing us about how UK savings rates are far too low and the secret to a successful economy is higher savings rates.
I believe he even made one of his videos about it.
Nope - I spent 30 seconds and found the appropriate video.
We need to increase our saving rates but over time as RCS says below and not overnight due to panic and the need to save due to threatened redundancy..
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Becausewould probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
LD
=20
Honestly, interesting as this kind of polling is, it is irrelevant to what will really happen at end of October.
If there are empty shelves, fuel problems, panic buying, meds issues etc etc then all these people now declaring they will back Boris and his No Deal is for the birds.
Fuel strike. Tony Blair. Early 2000s.
There won't be, the Government is now fully preparing for No Deal Brexit so any significant effects won't be felt for months. Plus given the apocalyptic warnings about No Deal if people have not died of starvation after the first week they will be wondering what the fuss was about.
Leavers are now fully behind getting Brexit done and No Deal and with the Remain vote split between Labour and LD Boris wins
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
The real risk to the UK economy from No Deal is that a confidence shock means consumers become more cautious, means that the savings rate inculus to reverse a cycle like that.
Even if unemployment ories not producing Armageddon will only benefit the Tories and Leavers even more
And this is why political opponents find it easy to portray Tories as callous
You voted for Leave not me, you won it putting sovereignty ahead of economics, you own it
I would never ever say that 200,000 unemployed is “a price worth paying” or anything close
That was the type of thing the Remain camp was warning about in the campaign, you ignored the advice and voted Leave anyway, fair enough if regaining sovereignty, ending free movement etc came first but don't pretend you did not know the risks (though I think much of this is still diehard Remainer scaremongering)
You’re missing the point again
On an individual level unemployment is a tragedy. You are too glib sometimes about things that really matter on a human level. As an aspiring politician you also create lots of ammunition for your opponents to use again you and your party.
Bad news for Labour then, the Tories won a majority of 60 in England at the last general election but no majority in the UK at all
Did they win 50%? Serious question. Because if they didn't, then in a PR system England would probably have a Lab/Lib coalition.
Except England does not have a PR system, FPTP won the 2011 referendum comfortably and even if it did on current England only polling a Tory and Brexit Party coalition would be just as likely as Labour and LD
Let's see how well that stacks up after a catastrophic No Deal exit shall we?
Honestly, interesting as this kind of polling is, it is irrelevant to what will really happen at end of October.
If there are empty shelves, fuel problems, panic buying, meds issues etc etc then all these people now declaring they will back Boris and his No Deal is for the birds.
Fuel strike. Tony Blair. Early 2000s.
Theren vote split between Labour and LD Boris wins
So, if there is food on the shelves (there will be), but unemployment spikes by 200,000, then people will say "well, it's nowhere near as bad as the black plague"?
The real risk to the UK economy from No Deal is that a confidence shock means consumers become more cautious, means that the savings rate increases, and we enter a negative feedback loop.
With interest rates currently at 0.75%, there is very little the government can do in the way of monetary stimulus to reverse a cycle like that.
Even if unemployment spiked by 200 000 that would be barely a fifth of the 1.2 million it rose by in 2008, a rise in savings may also be no bad thing.
So all the scare stories not producing Armageddon will only benefit the Tories and Leavers even more
And this is why political opponents find it easy to portray Tories as callous
You voted for Leave not me, you won it putting sovereignty ahead of economics, you own it
I would never ever say that 200,000 unemployed is “a price worth paying” or anything close
What's your number then Charles?
What's the cut off point for worth it/not worth it?
Which part of “I would never ever say [a number] is a “price worth paying” “ unclear?
It is quite pathetic it is left to Remainers who respect democracy like me to deliver the platform you voted for because you and Charles cannot face the consequences of your Leave vote
It is pathethic that I point out facts to you?
I'm struggling to understand your point.
The Leave campaign was based on regaining sovereignty, ending free movement and doing our own trade deals. You voted for that platform and now complain when it is implemented
Following on from the next lead (NEW THREAD), the article we are waiting for is the one from RCS conceding that voting leave was a mistake....
Comments
Once Brexit is done and she has nothing to disagree with Boris about they may explode.
Still there is always Salmonds trial to look forward to...
There is no measurement of brexit impact on UK in medium or long term, too many other variables. In that time we transform from industrial to post industrial. Robotics and automation makes a huge impact. Increased globalisation where in some sectors we cannot compete with wages 8x cheaper than here and container ships and Silk Road bringing goods here, nor the increase in providing services more cheaply from other side of world. UK workers set upon a difficult downward spiral of job type, reskilling and learning, pay, conditions, pension cost, whether we brexit or not.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
In the seven home Tests last year he scored 510 runs at an average of 46.36. I think that makes his selection a success and worth persisting with.
https://twitter.com/MichaelBennet/status/1158806845953323008
It's like looking forward to Guy Fawkes Night, let's see the fireworks.
I believe he even made one of his videos about it.
I'm struggling to understand your point.
That startling conclusion comes from BNP Paribas, which warned in a new report that crude oil is facing an existential and likely mortal threat from renewable energy and EVs."
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/The-Threat-That-Will-Send-Oil-Down-To-10.html
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1158850605147971585?s=20
That Venn diagram is rapidly approaching concentricity.
We need to increase our saving rates but over time as RCS says below and not overnight due to panic and the need to save due to threatened redundancy..
On an individual level unemployment is a tragedy. You are too glib sometimes about things that really matter on a human level. As an aspiring politician you also create lots of ammunition for your opponents to use again you and your party.