Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller. Which is a nonsense, since we may or may not decide to maintain immigration levels after Brexit.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
No they don't.
You have never visited a Jewish school I take it? The one my nephews go to has two armed guards on at any time, plus a string of lookouts up along the three streets adjoining.
Statements like “trickle down economics works. The plebs should be grateful” demonstrate why nobody likes that sort of conservative view. It’s said in jest, but you can see that part of it is believed.
That party is a useful vehicle for now on Brexit, but after that we’ll have to see whether it has been rehabilitated or not. I suspect not.
Is there any evidence for trickle down economics? Intuitively it seems blindingly obvious that 1,000 millionaires are going to circulate a lot more of £1bn than one billionaire is.
It’s not the logic that’s offensive (money has to circulate to make an economy work unless you go full communist) it’s the implication that those with money are “worth” more. The language “trickle down” suggests they are doing us a favour letting us have crumbs from the table.
Agreed.
And the other thing that is offensive is the "philanthropy". Nobody wants rich people's fucking philanthropy.
We just want them to pay their fair share of taxation.
“Fair” is doing a lot of work in that last sentence.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
It does not matter how "remainery" an individual Labour candidate may be, Corbyn and his team of minders will make sure that the Labour Party as a whole is definitely for Leaving. You just cannot trust Labour.
Statements like “trickle down economics works. The plebs should be grateful” demonstrate why nobody likes that sort of conservative view. It’s said in jest, but you can see that part of it is believed.
That party is a useful vehicle for now on Brexit, but after that we’ll have to see whether it has been rehabilitated or not. I suspect not.
Is there any evidence for trickle down economics? Intuitively it seems blindingly obvious that 1,000 millionaires are going to circulate a lot more of £1bn than one billionaire is.
It’s not the logic that’s offensive (money has to circulate to make an economy work unless you go full communist) it’s the implication that those with money are “worth” more. The language “trickle down” suggests they are doing us a favour letting us have crumbs from the table.
Quite. But my point was that even on its own terms the theory doesn't justify super richness, because there's limits on how much one individual can consume, so 1000 millionaires circulate more than one billionaire does.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
No they don't.
You have never visited a Jewish school I take it? The one my nephews go to has two armed guards on at any time, plus a string of lookouts up along the three streets adjoining.
Don’t forget the guards you see on community centres. It’s so sad to see where we’ve got to, and Corbyn has played a direct role in it.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
"And the other thing that is offensive is the "philanthropy". Nobody wants rich people's fucking philanthropy.
We just want them to pay their fair share of taxation.
"You're kidding right? What about Cancer Research UK?"
Cancer Research UK gets most of its money from small donations not from the "philanthropists" that Ybard is referring to. I agree with Ybard.
By the way, if you knew about the way the Cancer Research legally persued a client of mine over a legacy in a will, and how much it pays its staff, you may not think so highly of it.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Statements like “trickle down economics works. The plebs should be grateful” demonstrate why nobody likes that sort of conservative view. It’s said in jest, but you can see that part of it is believed.
That party is a useful vehicle for now on Brexit, but after that we’ll have to see whether it has been rehabilitated or not. I suspect not.
Is there any evidence for trickle down economics? Intuitively it seems blindingly obvious that 1,000 millionaires are going to circulate a lot more of £1bn than one billionaire is.
It’s not the logic that’s offensive (money has to circulate to make an economy work unless you go full communist) it’s the implication that those with money are “worth” more. The language “trickle down” suggests they are doing us a favour letting us have crumbs from the table.
Quite. But my point was that even on its own terms the theory doesn't justify super richness, because there's limits on how much one individual can consume, so 1000 millionaires circulate more than one billionaire does.
Oh I agree. I have no issue with people being rich, indeed I think envy is bad, but an obviously highly unequal society will not be a harmonious society.
I don’t know what you do about it as my liberal instincts dislike penal rates of taxation, but it’s bad for society.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
oose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
No they don't.
You have never visited a Jewish school I take it? The one my nephews go to has two armed guards on at any time, plus a string of lookouts up along the three streets adjoining.
Don’t forget the guards you see on community centres. It’s so sad to see where we’ve got to, and Corbyn has played a direct role in it.
Or every Jewish Temple. Presumably the likes of nichomar would tell us we are bringing the risk upon ourselves by doing that too.
Cancer Research UK gets most of its money from small donations not from the "philanthropists" that Ybard is referring to. I agree with Ybard.
By the way, if you knew about the way the Cancer Research legally persued a client of mine over a legacy in a will, and how much it pays its staff, you may not think so highly of it.
Is this that thing where everyone who is worth more than you is rich and everyone who is worth less than you is a salt of the earth type?
Brilliant tweet by Corbyn in response to Trumps comments .
Covers both angles and should be plastered over social media .
I've been out lunching and working, so I had to catch up with the news by reading the comments here. And the gist of them is: today was a brilliant day for Labour, Corbyn is up and running, Tories are in trouble already.
But then I looked at the two polls today, one of them showing the Tories with a 15 point lead, and the other showing Tories with a 17 point lead.
How can that possibly be a good day for Labour?! Or am I missing something?
It's an excellent day for Labour. Last election, Corbyn reduced the Tory lead by seventeen points by polling day!
No a day riven by class war and hatred from Labour which will reassure his leftwing fans but turn off swing voters and turn off centrist diehard Remainers who will go LD
Brilliant tweet by Corbyn in response to Trumps comments .
Covers both angles and should be plastered over social media .
I've been out lunching and working, so I had to catch up with the news by reading the comments here. And the gist of them is: today was a brilliant day for Labour, Corbyn is up and running, Tories are in trouble already.
But then I looked at the two polls today, one of them showing the Tories with a 15 point lead, and the other showing Tories with a 17 point lead.
How can that possibly be a good day for Labour?! Or am I missing something?
Corbyn's rally today reminded me of one of those cult-like Apple Shop launches.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Clearly maths is not your strong point. Stick to the day job.
The effect is compounded so builds over time, so less than £700 billion, and the denominator is a decade not a year. The effect is around 3.5% of the economy, not a third. It is still a lot of money as you point out. The paper is here:
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Serve them right for being Jewish, in other words.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Clearly maths is not your strong point. Stick to the day job.
The effect is compounded so builds over time, so less than £700 billion, and the denominator is a decade not a year. The effect is around 3.5% of the economy, not a third. It is still a lot of money as you point out. The paper is here:
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
The idea that anyone puts their preference for EU policy above and beyond support for the equality of their fellow citizens is very upsetting to me.
Well, it's more complicated than that, because membership of the EU preserves the rights and equalities of EU citizens who have settled here. How are you supposed to choose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Serve them right for being Jewish, in other words.
Even if you split them up I bet they would still be able to control the media, big business, and our politicians, damn them.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
It does not matter how "remainery" an individual Labour candidate may be, Corbyn and his team of minders will make sure that the Labour Party as a whole is definitely for Leaving. You just cannot trust Labour.
It's not me you need to convince, its the 10% of people who have been courted back to the LDs as far as VI goes, who may get nervous if they see predictions of 'Boris majority' for the next 6 weeks.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
oose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
No they don't.
You have never visited a Jewish school I take it? The one my nephews go to has two armed guards on at any time, plus a string of lookouts up along the three streets adjoining.
Don’t forget the guards you see on community centres. It’s so sad to see where we’ve got to, and Corbyn has played a direct role in it.
Or every Jewish Temple. Presumably the likes of nichomar would tell us we are bringing the risk upon ourselves by doing that too.
No all religions have a right to practice their religion I did not say you bring the risk on yourselves but I do not understand why anybody would bring their children up using a faith school. It’s illogical to the concept of education.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
Here I am in 2019 Britain being asked, as a Jew, why we Jews keep ourselves apart from society after a discussion about anti-Semitism and the violent threats against our children.
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
"And the other thing that is offensive is the "philanthropy". Nobody wants rich people's fucking philanthropy.
We just want them to pay their fair share of taxation.
"You're kidding right? What about Cancer Research UK?"
Cancer Research UK gets most of its money from small donations not from the "philanthropists" that Ybard is referring to. I agree with Ybard.
By the way, if you knew about the way the Cancer Research legally persued a client of mine over a legacy in a will, and how much it pays its staff, you may not think so highly of it.
There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise. In fact, the law requires them to be so - to maximise the resources available to pursue their aims, regardless of the human consequences. Ironically private businesses have more leeway and can chose to pursue an altruistic policy if they want to. Even a plc can make a case for acts of generosity through "corporate social responsibility". Not a charity, though.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
When you have the genda reasignment surgery, you should pickle your penis and send it to SeanT! He could probably do with a replacement given his wild boasts....
Statements like “trickle down economics works. The plebs should be grateful” demonstrate why nobody likes that sort of conservative view. It’s said in jest, but you can see that part of it is believed.
That party is a useful vehicle for now on Brexit, but after that we’ll have to see whether it has been rehabilitated or not. I suspect not.
Is there any evidence for trickle down economics? Intuitively it seems blindingly obvious that 1,000 millionaires are going to circulate a lot more of £1bn than one billionaire is.
The economy needs billionaires, and millionaires, those that are happy just to be able to live a decent life, and those that aspire to all of the above. Losing any of the above would be very bad. For those on the lowest rungs a good safety net is something that we, quite sensibly choose to add.
Any anti billionaire policy, or indeed a policy that forced out any section of society would be economically bad for us all. Douglas Adams clearly observed this in his telephone sanitiser theme. (I can't imagine that even on PB anyone would make the slightest of murmurs of disagreement on the above with him on my side!)
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
LOL!
btw if you want a head f##k try doing what I just have which is start reading 20-odd pages of Zadie Smith's NW in which she incorporates cut up/non linear prose and then come straight on to PB. It is very amusing. Not sure whether it's more a reflection on PB or Zadie Smith but it is very funny.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I thinky constitency, his issues can be ignored.
oose?
Also what about Windrush? Surely by Gabs2's logic anyone who votes Tory is also putting their preferences above the equality of their fellow citizens.
That's precisely the precedent that has so many EU citizens worried.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
No they don't.
You have never visited a Jewish school I take it? The one my nephews go to has two armed guards on at any time, plus a string of lookouts up along the three streets adjoining.
Don’t forget the guards you see on community centres. It’s so sad to see where we’ve got to, and Corbyn has played a direct role in it.
Or every Jewish Temple. Presumably the likes of nichomar would tell us we are bringing the risk upon ourselves by doing that too.
No all religions have a right to practice their religion I did not say you bring the risk on yourselves but I do not understand why anybody would bring their children up using a faith school. It’s illogical to the concept of education.
*********
As an entirely separate point I agree with you that all star funded schools should be free of religious connections.
However we are where we are and often the best schools to be had are the religiously connected ones. Unsurprisingly, parents therefore go for them.
I can get behind an argument which says “let’s start the process of ending religious schools” but that’s no why you’re saying.
Edit - quotes have got mixed up. Below line is me.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
It does not matter how "remainery" an individual Labour candidate may be, Corbyn and his team of minders will make sure that the Labour Party as a whole is definitely for Leaving. You just cannot trust Labour.
It's not me you need to convince, its the 10% of people who have been courted back to the LDs as far as VI goes, who may get nervous if they see predictions of 'Boris majority' for the next 6 weeks.
With Corbyn you get a guaranteed Venezuelan economic nightmare PLUS the uncertainty of another referendum which could easily be lost, anyway, and that's if Jeremy is true to his word (given that he's a Leaver) and calls a 2nd vote
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
Alphabet_Soup said: "There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise."
Yep. And what makes it worse is that it costs the Treasury a fortune through its donation tax-relief scheme. Would take a brave government to stop this though.
Sad to say that many charities are not run primarily for the benefit of the good cause but rather for the benefit of those that work within it.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
Here I am in 2019 Britain being asked, as a Jew, why we Jews keep ourselves apart from society after a discussion about anti-Semitism and the violent threats against our children.
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
It would depend very much on Constituency. Would I vote for Chris Williamson -No. Would I vote for Lab MPs like Jess Phillips who are actively opposing anti-semitism, to quote a famous LOTO, Hell Yeah!
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller. Which is a nonsense, since we may or may not decide to maintain immigration levels after Brexit.
GDP per capita per head is what the average voter will be interested in.
If the overall population and therefore aggregate GDP of UK plc is slightly smaller by 2030 than it might otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU I don’t think Joe Punter will be much bothered.
People measure quality of life on a number of factors, and maximising income is only one.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
Here I am in 2019 Britain being asked, as a Jew, why we Jews keep ourselves apart from society after a discussion about anti-Semitism and the violent threats against our children.
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
It doesn’t answer the question I wouldn’t be aware of somebodies religion unless they told me. I just think faith schools have no part in creating a multicultural society.
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
Here I am in 2019 Britain being asked, as a Jew, why we Jews keep ourselves apart from society after a discussion about anti-Semitism and the violent threats against our children.
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
It would depend very much on Constituency. Would I vote for Chris Williamson -No. Would I vote for Lab MPs like Jess Phillips who are actively opposing anti-semitism, to quote a famous LOTO, Hell Yeah!
Will Jess Phillips support Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister?
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
No one ever, ever said it would be a contraction. Even Faisal Islam spelled it out that it would be a diminution in growth.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
It does not matter how "remainery" an individual Labour candidate may be, Corbyn and his team of minders will make sure that the Labour Party as a whole is definitely for Leaving. You just cannot trust Labour.
It's not me you need to convince, its the 10% of people who have been courted back to the LDs as far as VI goes, who may get nervous if they see predictions of 'Boris majority' for the next 6 weeks.
With Corbyn you get a guaranteed Venezuelan economic nightmare PLUS the uncertainty of another referendum which could easily be lost, anyway, and that's if Jeremy is true to his word (given that he's a Leaver) and calls a 2nd vote
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
I can see Corbyn scares you...
I would vote Lab in a Lab held seat, but not in a Tory held one. Here I will vote LD. That should be both parties focus.
Foxy said: "Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him."
Any pictures of Mrs Foxy?
Perhaps she is one of the adoring women pictured behind Jo Swinson, frantically waving a gigantic orange placard saying "Jo Swinson", as shown on page 3 of the article "Jo Swinson, The Prime Minister We Deserve" in my just-received glossy LibDem pamphlet entitled "Jo Swinson, Britain's Next Prime Minister".
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
This is old news, and has been for nearly four years. We were debating NIESR, IMF and Capital Economics forecasts on here from late 2015 onwards.
Both sides should stop pretending this is what this is really about. It doesn’t shift a single vote either way.
Alphabet_Soup said: "There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise."
Yep. And what makes it worse is that it costs the Treasury a fortune through its donation tax-relief scheme. Would take a brave government to stop this though.
Sad to say that many charities are not run primarily for the benefit of the good cause but rather for the benefit of those that work within it.
Most efficient charity, Salvation Army CEO gets 30k pa and 99% of what they raise gets to the front line.
Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him.
Having just looked at the highlights, I agree. Jezza in in his element campaigning and working a crowd. The climate crisis might be this elections ace in the hole with the youngsters and a fair number of more senior voters, comparable to tuition fees in 2017.
If he lays into the Tories and not Lib Dems he will get a lot of tactical votes
Being a LD I think Dr Foxy's words are pretty notable here - so long as his minders keep him focused in the right diretion, LDs will vote tactically for Corbyn pretty easily I suspect.
I would like to think British Liberals would have more sympathy with their Jewish compatriots than to vote Corbyn. A vote for Corbyn is saying you are ok with Anti-Semitism.
I think there is very little question those thinking of voting LD will vote Labour in droves. Remainerism will see to that (where local candidate is suitably remainy), nothing else matters in terms of support, and it will be whether there's enough to put them off doing so. Since Corbyn is not standing in every constitency, his issues can be ignored.
It does not matter how "remainery" an individual Labour candidate may be, Corbyn and his team of minders will make sure that the Labour Party as a whole is definitely for Leaving. You just cannot trust Labour.
It's not me you need to convince, its the 10% of people who have been courted back to the LDs as far as VI goes, who may get nervous if they see predictions of 'Boris majority' for the next 6 weeks.
With Corbyn you get a guaranteed Venezuelan economic nightmare PLUS the uncertainty of another referendum which could easily be lost, anyway, and that's if Jeremy is true to his word (given that he's a Leaver) and calls a 2nd vote
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
I can see Corbyn scares you...
I would vote Lab in a Lab held seat, but not in a Tory held one. Here I will vote LD. That should be both parties focus.
You bet he scares me. He should scare anyone with a functioning nervous system. His policies would destroy the economy.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
It’s a classic example of a good piece of work being misused. It’s the sort of modelling you might use to consider tax and spending changes in a Budget; it’s a mad thing to use if you’re making a once in a generation change to how the U.K. works.
For the same reason this sort of analysis is silly when talking about Scottish independence or a Corbyn Gvt.
For the previous three elections the Tories have been well ahead of Labour on welfare.
That is interesting. I wonder if UC or fear of it is causing that? You would think raising the minimum wage and less relience on benefits would cause the reverse. Might well be a shy Labour vote lurking...
There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise. In fact, the law requires them to be so - to maximise the resources available to pursue their aims, regardless of the human consequences. Ironically private businesses have more leeway and can chose to pursue an altruistic policy if they want to. Even a plc can make a case for acts of generosity through "corporate social responsibility". Not a charity, though.
Citation needed. Certainly charities are required to pursue their stated aims, but not to "maximise the resources available, regardless of the human consequences."
I run the UK arm of an animal welfare charity. We try to be ethical and I don't recognise your description.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
How does it compare to the adaptations required for us to become carbon-neutral by 2030 or so?
Rightly so. I can think of nothing more scary than having my loved ones' fate in the hands of the Home Office.
Try taking your children to school past armed guards every day, which is what tens of thousands of Jews do every day.
Well you could send them to a none religious school and let the grow up in the wider society that’s available.
Ah got it. The Jews are to blame for the mortal threats against us because we keep ourselves apart?
F*ck you, you c*nt.
I don’t agree with religiously serrated schools fro whatever faith, they are wrong and are at the root of a lot of the problems in the world. Why do you keep yourselves apart?
Here I am in 2019 Britain being asked, as a Jew, why we Jews keep ourselves apart from society after a discussion about anti-Semitism and the violent threats against our children.
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
It would depend very much on Constituency. Would I vote for Chris Williamson -No. Would I vote for Lab MPs like Jess Phillips who are actively opposing anti-semitism, to quote a famous LOTO, Hell Yeah!
Will Jess Phillips support Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister?
I expect that she will be a thorn in his side, mostly by being more popular than him. Next leader imo.
Would you refuse to vote for Miliband, Smeeth or Hodge because of Corbyn's anti-semitism?
There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise. In fact, the law requires them to be so - to maximise the resources available to pursue their aims, regardless of the human consequences. Ironically private businesses have more leeway and can chose to pursue an altruistic policy if they want to. Even a plc can make a case for acts of generosity through "corporate social responsibility". Not a charity, though.
Citation needed. Certainly charities are required to pursue their stated aims, but not to "maximise the resources available, regardless of the human consequences."
I run the UK arm of an animal welfare charity. We try to be ethical and I don't recognise your description.
Of course you don't Nick. No one who works for a charity ever would of their own.
Foxy said: "Having arrived home, Mrs Foxy very impressed by Jezza's campaign launch. Normally she has a low opinion of him."
Any pictures of Mrs Foxy?
Perhaps she is one of the adoring women pictured behind Jo Swinson, frantically waving a gigantic orange placard saying "Jo Swinson", as shown on page 3 of the article "Jo Swinson, The Prime Minister We Deserve" in my just-received glossy LibDem pamphlet entitled "Jo Swinson, Britain's Next Prime Minister".
Where can I sue Jo Swinson, NOT our next PM?
In the same court that I sue Marcus Fysh in for lying to me before the referendum saying that we would never leave EFTA/EEA if the UK voted leave.
No one ever, ever said it would be a contraction. Even Faisal Islam spelled it out that it would be a diminution in growth.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
I know.
I personally think long term economic forecasting is about as useful as astrology. Economics is a far more useful tool for talking about what happened in a methodical way, than it is for predicting the future.
No one ever, ever said it would be a contraction. Even Faisal Islam spelled it out that it would be a diminution in growth.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
I know.
I personally think long term economic forecasting is about as useful as astrology. Economics is a far more useful tool for talking about what happened in a methodical way, than it is for predicting the future.
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
When you have the genda reasignment surgery, you should pickle your penis and send it to SeanT! He could probably do with a replacement given his wild boasts....
But would iCorbyn give Rasputin a run for his rouble?
"Stop Brexit for a brighter future". A bit vague by the Lib Dems. I think I'd go a little more DFS.
THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!! THE £70 BILLION BREXIT BONUS!!!
EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS!!!!
£70 Billion is over ten years, so it should be £7 Billion.
Apparently it's £70 billion a year.
(And as Richard said it should be 'A 70 Billion STOP Brexit Bonus'!!)
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
So how was the figure arrived at? Is it a GDP will have grown by a certain percentage less by 2029 than it otherwise would have? If so I would love to see the error bars...
It was a range of forecasts of something like 22% to 27% GDP growth (from 2015 levels), remaining in the EU being the top forecast. In all scenarios growth would still be substantial, on the order of £500 billion or more.
This is old news, and has been for nearly four years. We were debating NIESR, IMF and Capital Economics forecasts on here from late 2015 onwards.
Both sides should stop pretending this is what this is really about. It doesn’t shift a single vote either way.
The Economists have been lost-in-space for ages anyway. So far as I can tell every model is basically 'under review'. Actual economic modelling that people believed in went by the wayside in 2008. We now have a situation where a new set of tyres is fobbing us off from the horror story under the bonnet. That may though be a good thing.
No one ever, ever said it would be a contraction. Even Faisal Islam spelled it out that it would be a diminution in growth.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
I know.
I personally think long term economic forecasting is about as useful as astrology. Economics is a far more useful tool for talking about what happened in a methodical way, than it is for predicting the future.
Their analysis shows 2.5% lost growth already from Brexit. A further 3.5% over the next decade seems quite cautious to me.
Not a disaster, but a steady corrosion of competitiveness.
With Corbyn you get a guaranteed Venezuelan economic nightmare PLUS the uncertainty of another referendum which could easily be lost, anyway, and that's if Jeremy is true to his word (given that he's a Leaver) and calls a 2nd vote
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
It's generally assumed that the SNP and Liberal Democrats will both make gains in number of seats, so that there will be at least 100 seats not held by either Labour or the Conservatives. That means, in order to win 325 of the remaining seats and a majority either of these parties have to reduce the other to 225 seats or less.
I can see Labour being reduced to that number of seats quite easily. Not so much the Tories.
There is a huge no overall majority zone where Johnson and the ERG are chucked out of government, but Corbyn, or any other Labour Prime Minister is unable to cause too much damage from Number 10. The temporary government would be able to sort out a pair of second referendums in advance of [yet another] general election. No risk to anyone's property or pension.
In 2015 English voters were scared off voting for Labour at the prospect of him being at the mercy of the SNP. Right now wouldn't that be a relatively comforting prospect for many English voters?
The Economists have been lost-in-space for ages anyway. So far as I can tell every model is basically 'under review'. Actual economic modelling that people believed in went by the wayside in 2008. We now have a situation where a new set of tyres is fobbing us off from the horror story under the bonnet. That may though be a good thing.
It's not only the modelling, real things like monetary policy are dramatically different now.
With Corbyn you get a guaranteed Venezuelan economic nightmare PLUS the uncertainty of another referendum which could easily be lost, anyway, and that's if Jeremy is true to his word (given that he's a Leaver) and calls a 2nd vote
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
It's generally assumed that the SNP and Liberal Democrats will both make gains in number of seats, so that there will be at least 100 seats not held by either Labour or the Conservatives. That means, in order to win 325 of the remaining seats and a majority either of these parties have to reduce the other to 225 seats or less.
I can see Labour being reduced to that number of seats quite easily. Not so much the Tories.
There is a huge no overall majority zone where Johnson and the ERG are chucked out of government, but Corbyn, or any other Labour Prime Minister is unable to cause too much damage from Number 10. The temporary government would be able to sort out a pair of second referendums in advance of [yet another] general election. No risk to anyone's property or pension.
In 2015 English voters were scared off voting for Labour at the prospect of him being at the mercy of the SNP. Right now wouldn't that be a relatively comforting prospect for many English voters?
Quite right, an SNP block deciding the next government works for me.
No one ever, ever said it would be a contraction. Even Faisal Islam spelled it out that it would be a diminution in growth.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
I know.
I personally think long term economic forecasting is about as useful as astrology. Economics is a far more useful tool for talking about what happened in a methodical way, than it is for predicting the future.
Their analysis shows 2.5% lost growth already from Brexit. A further 3.5% over the next decade seems quite cautious to me.
Not a disaster, but a steady corrosion of competitiveness.
I'm curious as to where this 2.5% of extra growth would be.
Certainly not in manufacturing or anything else export oriented as the exchange rate would be less competitive.
I can't see construction being in any more than a boom than it has been and government services would be no different to what they have been.
So that leaves an even bigger consumption bubble - more spending on more imports.
And that together with the absence of the hundreds of billions of extra exports we've had in that period would have led to a monumental balance of payments crisis.
Of course pretty much all large western economies have struggled for growth in the last 18 months so I don't see why the UK would have done better than any of them as is apparently claimed.
Alphabet_Soup said: "There was a time - maybe 40 years ago - when it was felt that charities should be more "businesslike". This process has now gone full circle and most of them are just as avaricious as a profit-making enterprise."
Yep. And what makes it worse is that it costs the Treasury a fortune through its donation tax-relief scheme. Would take a brave government to stop this though.
Sad to say that many charities are not run primarily for the benefit of the good cause but rather for the benefit of those that work within it.
Most efficient charity, Salvation Army CEO gets 30k pa and 99% of what they raise gets to the front line.
Comments
F*ck you, you c*nt.
YbarddCwsc said:
"And the other thing that is offensive is the "philanthropy". Nobody wants rich people's fucking philanthropy.
We just want them to pay their fair share of taxation.
"You're kidding right? What about Cancer Research UK?"
Cancer Research UK gets most of its money from small donations not from the "philanthropists" that Ybard is referring to. I agree with Ybard.
By the way, if you knew about the way the Cancer Research legally persued a client of mine over a legacy in a will, and how much it pays its staff, you may not think so highly of it.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
I don’t know what you do about it as my liberal instincts dislike penal rates of taxation, but it’s bad for society.
And do you support class war which he has now openly commenced
The effect is compounded so builds over time, so less than £700 billion, and the denominator is a decade not a year. The effect is around 3.5% of the economy, not a third. It is still a lot of money as you point out. The paper is here:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002795011925000103
For @Fysics_Teacher the error bars are in their projections. It could be less, but of course it could be more...
This is what Corbyn and the filth around him have made mainstream. This is what will grow and fester the more votes Corbyn gets and the more Corbyn is seen as normal part of our politics.
Please, anyone that regards themselves as liberal-minded, do NOT legitimize these people with your votes. As soon as the Corbynites go, give the Tories the biggest whacking they ever deserve. But please do not abandon British Jews with a vote for Labour until then.
Any anti billionaire policy, or indeed a policy that forced out any section of society would be economically bad for us all. Douglas Adams clearly observed this in his telephone sanitiser theme. (I can't imagine that even on PB anyone would make the slightest of murmurs of disagreement on the above with him on my side!)
btw if you want a head f##k try doing what I just have which is start reading 20-odd pages of Zadie Smith's NW in which she incorporates cut up/non linear prose and then come straight on to PB. It is very amusing. Not sure whether it's more a reflection on PB or Zadie Smith but it is very funny.
It's not enticing for Remainers with property or pensions or quite nice lives.
Far better (if you're a Remainer) to vote Lib Dem and hope they win, and we get Revoke, and failing that it will be Boris who at least won't tank the economy, or crater property prices, and there's still a chance we get a soft Brexit in the later negotiations.
That's why I think Boris will edge to a small majority. Corbyn really is too scary.
Yep. And what makes it worse is that it costs the Treasury a fortune through its donation tax-relief scheme. Would take a brave government to stop this though.
Sad to say that many charities are not run primarily for the benefit of the good cause but rather for the benefit of those that work within it.
If the overall population and therefore aggregate GDP of UK plc is slightly smaller by 2030 than it might otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU I don’t think Joe Punter will be much bothered.
People measure quality of life on a number of factors, and maximising income is only one.
For the previous three elections the Tories have been well ahead of Labour on welfare.
Incidentally the forecast is from NIESR, the same people who produced the infamous treasury-used pre-referendum forecast which no one understood then either.
I would vote Lab in a Lab held seat, but not in a Tory held one. Here I will vote LD. That should be both parties focus.
Both sides should stop pretending this is what this is really about. It doesn’t shift a single vote either way.
It’s not impossible.
Then they get my full support.
For the same reason this sort of analysis is silly when talking about Scottish independence or a Corbyn Gvt.
I run the UK arm of an animal welfare charity. We try to be ethical and I don't recognise your description.
Would you refuse to vote for Miliband, Smeeth or Hodge because of Corbyn's anti-semitism?
I personally think long term economic forecasting is about as useful as astrology. Economics is a far more useful tool for talking about what happened in a methodical way, than it is for predicting the future.
https://twitter.com/HistoryHit/status/715615546386022404?s=20
Not a disaster, but a steady corrosion of competitiveness.
Now that would be economics worth arguing about in a general election.
I can see Labour being reduced to that number of seats quite easily. Not so much the Tories.
There is a huge no overall majority zone where Johnson and the ERG are chucked out of government, but Corbyn, or any other Labour Prime Minister is unable to cause too much damage from Number 10. The temporary government would be able to sort out a pair of second referendums in advance of [yet another] general election. No risk to anyone's property or pension.
In 2015 English voters were scared off voting for Labour at the prospect of him being at the mercy of the SNP. Right now wouldn't that be a relatively comforting prospect for many English voters?
Certainly not in manufacturing or anything else export oriented as the exchange rate would be less competitive.
I can't see construction being in any more than a boom than it has been and government services would be no different to what they have been.
So that leaves an even bigger consumption bubble - more spending on more imports.
And that together with the absence of the hundreds of billions of extra exports we've had in that period would have led to a monumental balance of payments crisis.
Of course pretty much all large western economies have struggled for growth in the last 18 months so I don't see why the UK would have done better than any of them as is apparently claimed.