Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
Does Monaco dictate the terms to France?
Yes, 100% yes.
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
On the fishing I think EU boats should be allowed but there should not be quota system. Instead the French and other fishing companies should be allowed to compete for a licence to fish in British waters, and that all catches be required to land their catch in British ports. That gives the UK control and supervision.
I am genuinely baffled as to why fishing is so fucking important in all this. It's a tiny fraction of the economy largely practiced by illiterates with missing fingers who probably don't vote anyway.
I've been on a boarding party that went aboard a trawler in the North Sea and it seemed liked the most uncomfortable and degrading way possible to make a living apart from being Alok Sharma.
To be honest that is just ignorant and an insult to all those in fishing communities
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
And if you knew the numbers of our family drowned at sea while fishing your inane comment about 'missing two fingers' is breathtaking
You think you are clever but you demonstrate extraordinary ignorance at times
@Dura_Ace has a lot of anger inside him he can't control very well and feels he needs to release, hence the aggressive posts on here, his (self-declared) personal unpleasantness to those he vociferously disagrees with offline, and his dangerous driving.
He needs help.
He doesn't instruct other posters to emigrate.
He's also at least half right. Hard to think of a more shit, dangerous, frightening and unrewarding job (except deep pit coal mining), and for those holistically thinking "But when will the white man realise you cannot eat money?" it seems as a nation we can't eat fish either. We export it.
The idea that having a trade surplus with somebody somehow makes you stronger in negotiations is crap. It misunderstands what trade is for. The best outcome for a country is not to run a huge surplus with everybody, nor is it to run a huge deficit. Imports serve an important role in keping a country competitive and meeting needs more cheaply than they can be met at home, thereby improving domestic welfare. And exports lower a country's standard of life, since the goods are produced at home and not consumed. They are therefore only desirable if they help you finance imports of goods you need and can't produce.
Focusing on the trade balance is like focusing on the budget deficit - it completely misunderstands what economic welfare is all about. The point of trade agreements is not to exploit or improve the balance of trade, but to maximise the total amount of trade. It is positive sum, not zero sum, or at any rate it should be.
That's true in an ideal system (the spherical cow in a vacuum) but in a system where China and Germany play the beggar-thy-neighbour game with trade it's not as black and white as that.
China and Germany aren't really playing beggar-thy-neighbour. They just produce goods other countries want to buy and have rapidly aging populations.
I gather the pubs in my nearby Tier 2 town have been absolutely dead Wed and Thurs evening. Some even shut well before 10pm as no customers.
Sunak needs to do something or the British pub will no longer exist in parts of UK.
As mentioned, I went out to dinner last night with some friends. The place was full of tables of 2-6. No one AFAICS was in a family group. I really can't believe that more than around 20% of restaurant/bar/pub/club visits are with family. Which leaves a gaping hole in establishments' revenue.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
Does Monaco dictate the terms to France?
Yes, 100% yes.
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
As a matter of fact it accepts whatever trade policy France decides.
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
The RN has prescriptive jurisdiction over every British flagged vessel. The master must obey any lawful directions received from the military vessel.
IIRC correctly there were also legal issues about weapons on a vessel commanded by a civilian.
Given the enthusiasm with which the Germans had hounded (and even executed) civilians for the crime of fighting back when attacked in WWI....
Some ships/boats had RNR captains - who were just activated, solving the legal issues.
Others - certainly cargo ships - had armed forces personnel sent on board to man the artillery, which also solved the training and watchkeeping load issues.
I believe that the general solution was that the captain was given military status (RNR or RNVR) on armed civilian ships.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Yes.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
The RN has prescriptive jurisdiction over every British flagged vessel. The master must obey any lawful directions received from the military vessel.
IIRC correctly there were also legal issues about weapons on a vessel commanded by a civilian.
Given the enthusiasm with which the Germans had hounded (and even executed) civilians for the crime of fighting back when attacked in WWI....
Some ships/boats had RNR captains - who were just activated, solving the legal issues.
Others - certainly cargo ships - had armed forces personnel sent on board to man the artillery, which also solved the training and watchkeeping load issues.
I believe that the general solution was that the captain was given military status (RNR or RNVR) on armed civilian ships.
That's interesting - a lot of them were RNR anyway as you said. But I didn't see any mention of this in the memoir of a WW2 convoy commodore which coincidentally I'm reading: or perhaps it was the non-Brit captains which give that impression. Must read up some more ...
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Yes.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
So on its own, Ireland would destroy the UK in any trade negotiations, but by joining up with a $15 trillion economy they have fatally weakened themselves and must accrpt whatever the UK dictates? I think you will find that to be a niche view.
I gather the pubs in my nearby Tier 2 town have been absolutely dead Wed and Thurs evening. Some even shut well before 10pm as no customers.
Sunak needs to do something or the British pub will no longer exist in parts of UK.
As mentioned, I went out to dinner last night with some friends. The place was full of tables of 2-6. No one AFAICS was in a family group. I really can't believe that more than around 20% of restaurant/bar/pub/club visits are with family. Which leaves a gaping hole in establishments' revenue.
It will be a variant of dont ask, dont tell. Ask and accept the blatant lies.
If Biden wins, will Brexit happen. What with COVID it could be put on hold for six months even longer, with pressure on the UK to hold another referendum!
This being PoliticalBetting I will answer that in the house style:
"How much do you want to bet that, at the end of 2021, the UK is not a member of the EU?"
I could give you my reasons, but really it's simpler to just force the issue every now and then. I'll give you well over evens if you want. Perhaps more simply:
"Why do you think that a Biden victory would lead to pressure to hold another Brexit referendum?"
One big 2016 mistake would have been fixed, why not fix the other?
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Yes.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
So on its own, Ireland would destroy the UK in any trade negotiations, but by joining up with a $15 trillion economy they have fatally weakened themselves and must accrpt whatever the UK dictates? I think you will find that to be a niche view.
I never said anything about destroying or fatal - that is an exaggeration on your part.
But the fact the EU is less than the sum of its parts? I don't think an exceptionally niche view.
I gather the pubs in my nearby Tier 2 town have been absolutely dead Wed and Thurs evening. Some even shut well before 10pm as no customers.
Sunak needs to do something or the British pub will no longer exist in parts of UK.
As mentioned, I went out to dinner last night with some friends. The place was full of tables of 2-6. No one AFAICS was in a family group. I really can't believe that more than around 20% of restaurant/bar/pub/club visits are with family. Which leaves a gaping hole in establishments' revenue.
It will be a variant of dont ask, dont tell. Ask and accept the blatant lies.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Yes.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
Does Monaco dictate the terms to France?
Yes, 100% yes.
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
Monaco couldn't do what it wanted during the Crise de Monaco of 1962. CDG blockaded them, switched off the water and forced Monaco to change its taxation code and constitution.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
If the UK and Ireland were negotiating a bilateral FTA, and abstracting from the border issues, would you agree that Ireland would hold all the cards?
Yes.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
Laughable.
So you think that taking the EU out of the picture the UK is still in a position to bully Ireland? And that Ireland being wealthier now and not impoverished hasn't changed matters on the ground?
That is laughable. I have more faith in the Irish than you do it seems.
The most surprising thing about the US election is the stubbornness of the betting markets. Biden has a ten-point lead, twenty million votes have already been cast and registered, with millions more no doubt already in the post or being processed, election day is just two and a half weeks away, the forecasting models such as 538 and the Economist all agree that Biden has an 85% to 90% chance of winning and all have their weighted forecasts at over 340 Biden ECVs, and yet the markets are stuck at an implied 34% probability of Trump bringing off a win, and the spreads are stuck at around 321 Biden ECVs.
Watching too many American films .....when you thought he was dead the baddie comes out of the cellar with a chainsaw.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
Germany may be richer than the UK but we're not negotiating with Germany we are negotiating with the EU. The UK is richer than the EU is.
Holy crap, how in the name of the wee man can you come to that conclusion
UK GDP per capita $42,944 EU GDP per capita $34,883
Is 42,944 more or less than 34,883?
We really are adding beans aren't we?
UK: $42,944 x 66m = $2.834tn EU: $34,883 x 447m = $15.593tn
I'm still reasonably confident that the EU's $15.6tn size is a bigger number than the UK's $2.8tn size.
The aggregate is irrelevant. What matters is the individuals, the average.
Nope, when you're trying to calculate leverage in negotiations or the world, it's the aggregate that counts.
Simply repeating that doesn't make it true.
Does Monaco dictate the terms to France?
Yes, 100% yes.
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
Lithuania has twice the GDP of China...
Absolutely Lithuanians are much, much, much richer than the Chinese.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
Look at other developed nations across the globe over the past three decades since the EEC turned into the EU and answer one simple question for me please: can you name any two developed nations the EU has outperformed in your eyes and why?
On topic, thanks Mike for a very informative header. A few thoughts.
1. How much is cannibalisation? From what I have seen of the NC figures, and from what Bitzer has said, it seems like 75pc plus of the early voters voted in 2016 with very few non-16 voters and the rest were not registered in 2016 (I think the ratio was 1:4 or thereabouts).
That is fine and, if the Hunter Biden issues escalate (the NY Post seems to be doubling down), it’s good to get the votes banked.
2. Related to this, it’s worth remembering that in NC, PA and FL, the Republicans are running ahead in new registrations. So, if the bulk of the additional “new” votes are coming from people not registered in 2016 than non-2016 voters, it is likely the Republicans will catch up in those states;
3. There is some evidence out of MI and WI that very Republican counties are seeing high early voting turnout rates. Given the demographic issues, that would probably be a good indicator for OH and PA. it might also suggest a high WWC turnout
Clearly a lot of it is 'cannibalisation', in the sense of just bringing forward votes that would have been placed anyway. And it is also true that in general the most committed voters are those who vote early. Nonetheless, the overall picture is good for Biden for a couple of reasons:
1. It's looking like a higher turnout than in 2016, suggesting that some of those who couldn't be bothered last time because they were unenthused by Hillary are voting this time.
2. A vote in the bag today is worth N prospective votes in the box on November 3rd, where N is some number fractionally greater than 1. A big advantage on this protects Biden to some extent against a last-minute drift towards Trump, and against the likelihood that some of those intending to vote in person on the day (or at the last moment in early voting) won't in fact do so, either because they don't get round to it, or because voting is disturbed by Covid-19 issues or some other problems.
It's hard to quantify how big any such effects are, but the bottom line is that with a current ten-point or so lead, the more and earlier that Biden can get that advantage solidified into cast votes, the better for him.
The polls might be wrong, but the only poll of voters already voted I've has a ~ 54% lead for Biden. He is clearly millions of votes in front with votes already cast.
This is done. I'm considering selling all I possess and laying Trump at 2.98. Going to be discussing that with my wife this afternoon. I have points in the bank from erecting a wardrobe recently.
Wardrobe still standing?
To my slight surprise, it is. I'm not by any stretch good at that sort of thing.
Lancashire will have more Covid patients on ventilation within fortnight than during first wave, government says The DHSC news release also explains why Lancashire is going into tier 3. It says:
In Lancashire, infection rates are among the highest in the country and continuing to rise rapidly. Rates are highest for those aged 16-29 at 552 per 100,000 people, while in the most vulnerable age group, those aged over 60, cases stand at 214 per 100,000 people. This increases to 594 over 100,000 for the over 60s in Burnley and 671 per 100,000 for 16- to 29-year-olds.
Hospitalisations can occur two to three weeks after someone is infected with the virus, meaning we anticipate the number of patients in hospital in Lancashire to rise.
The number of patients with Covid-19 in intensive care beds has reached nearly half the number seen at the height of the pandemic earlier this year, and the latest data suggests there will be more people in mechanical ventilation beds in Lancashire within two weeks than there were in the first wave. This is as a result of infections which have already happened, rather than a prediction – underlining the need for urgent action now to prevent the epidemic in Lancashire rising even further.
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
The RN has prescriptive jurisdiction over every British flagged vessel. The master must obey any lawful directions received from the military vessel.
IIRC correctly there were also legal issues about weapons on a vessel commanded by a civilian.
Given the enthusiasm with which the Germans had hounded (and even executed) civilians for the crime of fighting back when attacked in WWI....
Some ships/boats had RNR captains - who were just activated, solving the legal issues.
Others - certainly cargo ships - had armed forces personnel sent on board to man the artillery, which also solved the training and watchkeeping load issues.
I believe that the general solution was that the captain was given military status (RNR or RNVR) on armed civilian ships.
That's interesting - a lot of them were RNR anyway as you said. But I didn't see any mention of this in the memoir of a WW2 convoy commodore which coincidentally I'm reading: or perhaps it was the non-Brit captains which give that impression. Must read up some more ...
I'm not sure how much it got talked about at the fleet level. But it was a concern for the Admiralty lawyers & decision makers.
One issue was that the British position in international naval law had long been to eliminate any letter-of-marque style stuff. Anything less than military command of weapons was considered bad.
But apparently there’s no money available to help those affected by trading restrictions.
This is a political choice by Sunak: money for consultants is good. Money for businesses forced to close or restrict trading because of the government’s measures is bad.
It's actually these smaller contracts that are the more dubious I think.
Asking Deloitte to set up Test and Trace was a strategic mistake, but I can well believe that govt Ministers thought getting a private sector consultancy in was a good idea and were happy to pay over the odds.
But paying 280k for 6 months work... and then trying to mislead the public by saying it was unpaid... that's just so dodgy.
I gather the pubs in my nearby Tier 2 town have been absolutely dead Wed and Thurs evening. Some even shut well before 10pm as no customers.
Sunak needs to do something or the British pub will no longer exist in parts of UK.
As mentioned, I went out to dinner last night with some friends. The place was full of tables of 2-6. No one AFAICS was in a family group. I really can't believe that more than around 20% of restaurant/bar/pub/club visits are with family. Which leaves a gaping hole in establishments' revenue.
It will be a variant of dont ask, dont tell. Ask and accept the blatant lies.
Don't mask, don't tell.
It occurred to me yesterday that the masks we are all wearing are really the nose knickers Dave Allen described all those years ago.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
There are many other examples I could quote. In too many areas, the Western community has moved towards the position that change is too much trouble.
We have reached the point where the considered opinion of the experts is that building a new bridge at Hammersmith is impossible.
The sane thing to do would be to get rid of the existing piece of garbage and replace it - if you are upset about the pretty stuff on top, you can stick that back on.
Mind you, the previous "renovation" of the bridge totally changed the nature of the load bearing structure, so you could argue that the existing bridge is a pastiche.
Apologies for the crap quality but considering the nature of this morning's debate, surely this one is more relevabt
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dPzFUiY-tg
I never liked watching Harry Enfield. He is so good at portraying an obnoxious twat that I believe that he is an obnoxious twat. He could be the nicest person there is in real life ....
Daily revelations of Tory corruption go by with no challenge or comment, it’s a disgrace and it all needs investigating and the offenders prosecuted.
As we have seen the investigators and overseers are all chums and on the take, married to , related to , etc. It is a bonaza for the Tories and their families/chums etc.
If Biden wins, will Brexit happen. What with COVID it could be put on hold for six months even longer, with pressure on the UK to hold another referendum!
Brexit has happened and it's not going to be reversed any time soon. The deal we strike with the USA will depend on who the next President is. Biden doesn't like Brexit but is not generally inimical to the the UK. Trump cannot be trusted, will screw anyone to the ground and likes nobody but himself.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
From memory last time we went through this,
The UK is richer per head on average than the EU27 per head on average. Because in that case, it's the average per person that matters.
For trade balances, overall the EU exports more to us than the UK does to them. The fact that EU -> UK exports per head or per business are lower than UK -> EU exports per head is neither here nor there; in this case it's the block totals that matter.
The funny thing is this. In a world where you can find experts happy to say almost anything, I'm not aware of any experts in Europe who are saying to Barnier et al "Pull back you fools! Can't you see the obvious strength of the British position!" If they existed, I'm sure we would have heard about them by now. If there are any, I'd love to hear more about them.
Maybe they're stuck in German cars with the Italian prosecco exporters and French fishermen.
Yup. They aren't saying it because it isn't true. Its basic maths that a trading area worth c €13tn is bigger than a country worth c €2tn. The bigger the market value the higher the value to the counter party. The idea that the UK by itself will get better terms than the EU as a block is genuinely laughable. Which as you point out is why no credible commentators are saying so.
It is something that anyone with half a brain can work out. Brexiteers continue in denial about it. The next thick arse idea is that we would get a good trade deal from Donald Trump, assuming he manages a Houdini like escape from all indications of defeat. You essentially have to be either economically illiterate or just lying to say that Brexit will be an economically good thing for the UK.
Think the first, amazing what having an economics degree does for your all seeing knowledge
If one person has one pizza to eat by himself, or 30 people have two pizzas of the same size to share between all of then, who do you think is going to go hungry? The one with only one pizza, or the 30 with two to share between them?
Per capita is the only metric that matters.
Doh, If you have a shop , and you have choice of 1 person buying goods or 26 people buying goods, which do you think is the best option
Apologies for the crap quality but considering the nature of this morning's debate, surely this one is more relevabt
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dPzFUiY-tg
I never liked watching Harry Enfield. He is so good at portraying an obnoxious twat that I believe that he is an obnoxious twat. He could be the nicest person there is in real life ....
Your objection to Harry Enfield is that he's a good actor?
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
Look at other developed nations across the globe over the past three decades since the EEC turned into the EU and answer one simple question for me please: can you name any two developed nations the EU has outperformed in your eyes and why?
The EU is not a nation. It is a group of nations in a member's club.
Former chief scientific advisor with Pfizer Mike Yeadon says they are pushing the PCR testing "beyond any sensible limit, there's exaggeration...there's bad practice"
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
The RN has prescriptive jurisdiction over every British flagged vessel. The master must obey any lawful directions received from the military vessel.
IIRC correctly there were also legal issues about weapons on a vessel commanded by a civilian.
Given the enthusiasm with which the Germans had hounded (and even executed) civilians for the crime of fighting back when attacked in WWI....
Some ships/boats had RNR captains - who were just activated, solving the legal issues.
Others - certainly cargo ships - had armed forces personnel sent on board to man the artillery, which also solved the training and watchkeeping load issues.
I believe that the general solution was that the captain was given military status (RNR or RNVR) on armed civilian ships.
That's interesting - a lot of them were RNR anyway as you said. But I didn't see any mention of this in the memoir of a WW2 convoy commodore which coincidentally I'm reading: or perhaps it was the non-Brit captains which give that impression. Must read up some more ...
I'm not sure how much it got talked about at the fleet level. But it was a concern for the Admiralty lawyers & decision makers.
One issue was that the British position in international naval law had long been to eliminate any letter-of-marque style stuff. Anything less than military command of weapons was considered bad.
Fishing is objectively irrelevant for GDP. @Dura_Ace is right
So is ballet, but look how offended people got about the very notion of retraining to get a better paid and more productive job.
It is curious example of British snobbery, which disdains all practical/computing/engineering skills.
We are paying the price for this foolishness with gradual national impoverishment.
The subtext of the criticism is that a job in cyber is ... somehow dirty & low-grade & inferior ... compared to a job in ballet.
Particularly since being a ballerina is a job with a very definite age limit. And there are (even before COVID) very limited positions in the ballet world to advance to.
If Biden wins, will Brexit happen. What with COVID it could be put on hold for six months even longer, with pressure on the UK to hold another referendum!
Brexit has happened and it's not going to be reversed any time soon. The deal we strike with the USA will depend on who the next President is. Biden doesn't like Brexit but is not generally inimical to the the UK. Trump cannot be trusted, will screw anyone to the ground and likes nobody but himself.
Not sure who would give us the better deal.
Neither - I don't think there's the political space on either side of the channel for a comprehensive FTA deal.
I can see several bilateral micro-deals being done, however.
That is interesting. Genomic analysis showing evidence for the importation of the virus into Wales from the rest of the UK, tied in with controls or the lack thereof.
The most surprising thing about the US election is the stubbornness of the betting markets. Biden has a ten-point lead, twenty million votes have already been cast and registered, with millions more no doubt already in the post or being processed, election day is just two and a half weeks away, the forecasting models such as 538 and the Economist all agree that Biden has an 85% to 90% chance of winning and all have their weighted forecasts at over 340 Biden ECVs, and yet the markets are stuck at an implied 34% probability of Trump bringing off a win, and the spreads are stuck at around 321 Biden ECVs.
I decided last week not to take an uncancellable flight, so I topped up Dems winning party enough to cover the loss. That sort of hubris deserves to be punished.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
Do you honestly think we're the stronger partner compared to the EU
Yes of course I do. We are richer, have a trade deficit and the issues of dispute we get in full if we walk away.
We just need the confidence to believe in ourselves.
The UK 1 is richer than the EU 27?
Yes.
Well obviously. That Germany alone is richer than the UK proves that Germany plus the other 26 are poorer than we are.
From memory last time we went through this,
The UK is richer per head on average than the EU27 per head on average. Because in that case, it's the average per person that matters.
For trade balances, overall the EU exports more to us than the UK does to them. The fact that EU -> UK exports per head or per business are lower than UK -> EU exports per head is neither here nor there; in this case it's the block totals that matter.
The funny thing is this. In a world where you can find experts happy to say almost anything, I'm not aware of any experts in Europe who are saying to Barnier et al "Pull back you fools! Can't you see the obvious strength of the British position!" If they existed, I'm sure we would have heard about them by now. If there are any, I'd love to hear more about them.
Maybe they're stuck in German cars with the Italian prosecco exporters and French fishermen.
Yup. They aren't saying it because it isn't true. Its basic maths that a trading area worth c €13tn is bigger than a country worth c €2tn. The bigger the market value the higher the value to the counter party. The idea that the UK by itself will get better terms than the EU as a block is genuinely laughable. Which as you point out is why no credible commentators are saying so.
It is something that anyone with half a brain can work out. Brexiteers continue in denial about it. The next thick arse idea is that we would get a good trade deal from Donald Trump, assuming he manages a Houdini like escape from all indications of defeat. You essentially have to be either economically illiterate or just lying to say that Brexit will be an economically good thing for the UK.
Think the first, amazing what having an economics degree does for your all seeing knowledge
If one person has one pizza to eat by himself, or 30 people have two pizzas of the same size to share between all of then, who do you think is going to go hungry? The one with only one pizza, or the 30 with two to share between them?
Per capita is the only metric that matters.
Doh, If you have a shop , and you have choice of 1 person buying goods or 26 people buying goods, which do you think is the best option
Except the 26 people already have 26 other shops to buy from too. They won't a captive market, that's why looking at aggregate is meaningless twaddle and only per capita matters.
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
The RN has prescriptive jurisdiction over every British flagged vessel. The master must obey any lawful directions received from the military vessel.
IIRC correctly there were also legal issues about weapons on a vessel commanded by a civilian.
Given the enthusiasm with which the Germans had hounded (and even executed) civilians for the crime of fighting back when attacked in WWI....
Some ships/boats had RNR captains - who were just activated, solving the legal issues.
Others - certainly cargo ships - had armed forces personnel sent on board to man the artillery, which also solved the training and watchkeeping load issues.
I believe that the general solution was that the captain was given military status (RNR or RNVR) on armed civilian ships.
That's interesting - a lot of them were RNR anyway as you said. But I didn't see any mention of this in the memoir of a WW2 convoy commodore which coincidentally I'm reading: or perhaps it was the non-Brit captains which give that impression. Must read up some more ...
I'm not sure how much it got talked about at the fleet level. But it was a concern for the Admiralty lawyers & decision makers.
One issue was that the British position in international naval law had long been to eliminate any letter-of-marque style stuff. Anything less than military command of weapons was considered bad.
In fact, part of the early Hangue and Geneva conventions was to give protection to irregular but organised (?!?) groups under international law, to prevent a repeat of what happened in 1870.
My favourite one, was where the German military, in WWI decided that -
- They needed to invade France via Belgium - Since they needed to march through Belgium, it was a *crime* for the Belgians to try and stop them. Not just civilians. The Belgian nation was guilty of not acquiescing to the requirements of the Kaisers army....
We are all so discounting the rhetoric that a deadline passed yesterday almost unnoticed.
There will be a deal at the last possible moment. The rest is hype and tactics. When the last possible moment is has already been put back from yesterday.
Former chief scientific advisor with Pfizer Mike Yeadon says they are pushing the PCR testing "beyond any sensible limit, there's exaggeration...there's bad practice"
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
Look at other developed nations across the globe over the past three decades since the EEC turned into the EU and answer one simple question for me please: can you name any two developed nations the EU has outperformed in your eyes and why?
Fools errand with terrific scope for taking us off the point. The illuminating comparison is the growth of developed nations vs that of less developed nations. This demonstrates the point I'm making. Then we could - if we really want to - review the growth of individual developed nations relative to each other in order to glean further marginal insights. Do you want to do that? Attempt to glean further marginal insights? If so, we need a table of all the developed nations with cumulative growth rates over (say) 5,10,25 years.
We are all so discounting the rhetoric that a deadline passed yesterday almost unnoticed.
There will be a deal at the last possible moment. The rest is hype and tactics. When the last possible moment is has already been put back from yesterday.
Boris and Macron actually get on rather well and text each other regularly.
This is well choreographed panto which, yes, could go on all the way till Christmas.
Interesting article on the LockdownSkeptics website today from Dr Mike Yeadon. Suggests immunity levels are much higher than SAGE are assuming - on the face of it a convincing argument.
Lord Frost gave a tart response to the EU’s conclusions, saying he had been “surprised” by the suggestion that all future moves needed to come from the UK. “It’s an unusual approach to conducting a negotiation.”
If you're clearly the weak partner, you do the conceding, who knew?
We're not clearly the weaker partner though.
It's not a question of weak and strong, but rather brittle and flexible. The EU's position has to take into account 27 countries' views. That makes it inflexible. Like the oak and the bamboo in a strong wind - the oak falls while the bamboo bends.
Indeed and that inflexibility is what is wrong with the EU and why the EU is a failing sclerotic region that is shrinking rapidly as a share of the world economy.
We should embrace our flexibility in full, walk away and trade on a global not European stage as flexibly as we can.
I'd have thought it was obvious the primary reason for the EU's declining share of the world economy is simply because it is developed, rather than developing economy. Pretty much the same applies to any other first world region. It is therefore a nonsense to suggest that this is a sensible reason to leave the EU.
Compare Europe against other developed economies (not just developing ones) and the same fact is true.
Look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, America etc . . . Europe is sclerotic and being left behind.
Europe is not "sclerotic", Philip. It's mature. Is a mighty oak sclerotic? Would you point and call it that if you came across one? No. You'd gaze at it in wonder. At least I hope that's the case.
I had an entertaining conversation with a certain MP once. She decried the fact that the current government wasn't pushing forward in space technology - falling behind etc etc...
When I reminded her that she had carefully and with considerable effort thwarted plans by a UK company to set up a test site for liquid fueled rocket engines - well apparently that wasn't the point.
Apparently we need awesome innovation and technology. Just nothing built or done anywhere near... me.
I have been told by someone involved in European space efforts that the French are arguing for a response to Starlink - the response being not licensing* its usage in the EU....
*Terminals and ground stations require national approval.
I see. Well, balance etc. Deregulation liberates animal spirits, yes, but OTOH, you don't want to sacrifice everything in pursuit of technical advancement and growth. The notion of Europe as "sclerotic" continent stuck in its ways and risk averse while other parts of the world hum with dynamism and a buccaneering joie de vivre, I don't look at it like that. I think it's just a cliche and misses the point. The golden rule is a scientific not economic one - the conversion of potential to kinetic. Meaning that in general that the countries who will grow the most are those with the most room to do so, i.e. those who are "less developed" now. This is not us, inside or outside of the European Union.
Look at other developed nations across the globe over the past three decades since the EEC turned into the EU and answer one simple question for me please: can you name any two developed nations the EU has outperformed in your eyes and why?
Fools errand with terrific scope for taking us off the point. The illuminating comparison is the growth of developed nations vs that of less developed nations. This demonstrates the point I'm making. Then we could - if we really want to - review the growth of individual developed nations relative to each other in order to glean further marginal insights. Do you want to do that? Attempt to glean further marginal insights? If so, we need a table of all the developed nations with cumulative growth rates over (say) 5,10,25 years.
Unless you think the EU is the only developed region in the world, then its not a fools errand.
As a share of the developed world the EU is shrinking. It is sclerotic and failing.
See, in particular, points 5 & 6 “5. If there is no FTA between the EU and the U.K. by 31 December 2020, the U.K. will not have a trading arrangement like the one Australia currently has with the EU. It will have no trading arrangement. None. It will, as far as the EU is concerned, be a third country.
6. Australia’s arrangement is not the default. Why? Well, the current trading arrangements are based on the 2008 EU-Australian Partnership Framework, a fancy word for a general agreement to be friends. The key point is that it is an agreement. If Britain leaves the transition period with no agreement, some alternative agreement – whether like the Australian or any other one – does not magic itself into existence. The PM’s statement on this is, bluntly, an untruth.“
On topic, thanks Mike for a very informative header. A few thoughts.
1. How much is cannibalisation? From what I have seen of the NC figures, and from what Bitzer has said, it seems like 75pc plus of the early voters voted in 2016 with very few non-16 voters and the rest were not registered in 2016 (I think the ratio was 1:4 or thereabouts).
That is fine and, if the Hunter Biden issues escalate (the NY Post seems to be doubling down), it’s good to get the votes banked.
2. Related to this, it’s worth remembering that in NC, PA and FL, the Republicans are running ahead in new registrations. So, if the bulk of the additional “new” votes are coming from people not registered in 2016 than non-2016 voters, it is likely the Republicans will catch up in those states;
3. There is some evidence out of MI and WI that very Republican counties are seeing high early voting turnout rates. Given the demographic issues, that would probably be a good indicator for OH and PA. it might also suggest a high WWC turnout
Clearly a lot of it is 'cannibalisation', in the sense of just bringing forward votes that would have been placed anyway. And it is also true that in general the most committed voters are those who vote early. Nonetheless, the overall picture is good for Biden for a couple of reasons:
1. It's looking like a higher turnout than in 2016, suggesting that some of those who couldn't be bothered last time because they were unenthused by Hillary are voting this time.
2. A vote in the bag today is worth N prospective votes in the box on November 3rd, where N is some number fractionally greater than 1. A big advantage on this protects Biden to some extent against a last-minute drift towards Trump, and against the likelihood that some of those intending to vote in person on the day (or at the last moment in early voting) won't in fact do so, either because they don't get round to it, or because voting is disturbed by Covid-19 issues or some other problems.
It's hard to quantify how big any such effects are, but the bottom line is that with a current ten-point or so lead, the more and earlier that Biden can get that advantage solidified into cast votes, the better for him.
The polls might be wrong, but the only poll of voters already voted I've has a ~ 54% lead for Biden. He is clearly millions of votes in front with votes already cast.
1.15 before commission on the Dems to win the popular vote looks a relative steal.
It's an absolute steal.
Free money.
The 1.04 on Clinton to win the popular vote that was still available the day after the election was free money (and how I repaired some of the damage)
This is merely almost completely 100% guaranteed money.
On topic, thanks Mike for a very informative header. A few thoughts.
1. How much is cannibalisation? From what I have seen of the NC figures, and from what Bitzer has said, it seems like 75pc plus of the early voters voted in 2016 with very few non-16 voters and the rest were not registered in 2016 (I think the ratio was 1:4 or thereabouts).
That is fine and, if the Hunter Biden issues escalate (the NY Post seems to be doubling down), it’s good to get the votes banked.
2. Related to this, it’s worth remembering that in NC, PA and FL, the Republicans are running ahead in new registrations. So, if the bulk of the additional “new” votes are coming from people not registered in 2016 than non-2016 voters, it is likely the Republicans will catch up in those states;
3. There is some evidence out of MI and WI that very Republican counties are seeing high early voting turnout rates. Given the demographic issues, that would probably be a good indicator for OH and PA. it might also suggest a high WWC turnout
Clearly a lot of it is 'cannibalisation', in the sense of just bringing forward votes that would have been placed anyway. And it is also true that in general the most committed voters are those who vote early. Nonetheless, the overall picture is good for Biden for a couple of reasons:
1. It's looking like a higher turnout than in 2016, suggesting that some of those who couldn't be bothered last time because they were unenthused by Hillary are voting this time.
2. A vote in the bag today is worth N prospective votes in the box on November 3rd, where N is some number fractionally greater than 1. A big advantage on this protects Biden to some extent against a last-minute drift towards Trump, and against the likelihood that some of those intending to vote in person on the day (or at the last moment in early voting) won't in fact do so, either because they don't get round to it, or because voting is disturbed by Covid-19 issues or some other problems.
It's hard to quantify how big any such effects are, but the bottom line is that with a current ten-point or so lead, the more and earlier that Biden can get that advantage solidified into cast votes, the better for him.
The polls might be wrong, but the only poll of voters already voted I've has a ~ 54% lead for Biden. He is clearly millions of votes in front with votes already cast.
1.15 before commission on the Dems to win the popular vote looks a relative steal.
It's an absolute steal.
Free money.
The 1.04 on Clinton to win the popular vote that was still available the day after the election was free money (and how I repaired some of the damage)
This is merely almost completely 100% guaranteed money.
We are all so discounting the rhetoric that a deadline passed yesterday almost unnoticed.
There will be a deal at the last possible moment. The rest is hype and tactics. When the last possible moment is has already been put back from yesterday.
Boris and Macron actually get on rather well and text each other regularly.
This is well choreographed panto which, yes, could go on all the way till Christmas.
See, in particular, points 5 & 6 “5. If there is no FTA between the EU and the U.K. by 31 December 2020, the U.K. will not have a trading arrangement like the one Australia currently has with the EU. It will have no trading arrangement. None. It will, as far as the EU is concerned, be a third country.
6. Australia’s arrangement is not the default. Why? Well, the current trading arrangements are based on the 2008 EU-Australian Partnership Framework, a fancy word for a general agreement to be friends. The key point is that it is an agreement. If Britain leaves the transition period with no agreement, some alternative agreement – whether like the Australian or any other one – does not magic itself into existence. The PM’s statement on this is, bluntly, an untruth.“
I do understand but it looks very much like a no deal
Fishing is objectively irrelevant for GDP. @Dura_Ace is right
So is ballet, but look how offended people got about the very notion of retraining to get a better paid and more productive job.
It is curious example of British snobbery, which disdains all practical/computing/engineering skills.
We are paying the price for this foolishness with gradual national impoverishment.
The subtext of the criticism is that a job in cyber is ... somehow dirty & low-grade & inferior ... compared to a job in ballet.
And the subtext of the ad is that a job in cyber is superior to one in ballet. That one should abandon one's addle-headed dreams of spreading a little joy in this grim world with your beauty, Grace and skill in return for a larger, regular pay cheque from the man. National wealth in terms of pure pounds and pence. Wonderful!
See, in particular, points 5 & 6 “5. If there is no FTA between the EU and the U.K. by 31 December 2020, the U.K. will not have a trading arrangement like the one Australia currently has with the EU. It will have no trading arrangement. None. It will, as far as the EU is concerned, be a third country.
6. Australia’s arrangement is not the default. Why? Well, the current trading arrangements are based on the 2008 EU-Australian Partnership Framework, a fancy word for a general agreement to be friends. The key point is that it is an agreement. If Britain leaves the transition period with no agreement, some alternative agreement – whether like the Australian or any other one – does not magic itself into existence. The PM’s statement on this is, bluntly, an untruth.“
I do understand but it looks very much like a no deal
Yes. No Deal. Not an Australia-style deal. Which is a lie - one repeatedly said by the PM and repeated by his supporters.
Interesting article on the LockdownSkeptics website today from Dr Mike Yeadon. Suggests immunity levels are much higher than SAGE are assuming - on the face of it a convincing argument.
As much as I think this is theatre and talks will continue until the last minute, it genuinely fucking revolts me when I see people who will be insulated from the shock of a disorderly exit from the transition period (particularly those on fixed incomes) cheerlead for that outcome. If you genuinely can't put yourself in the position of a farmer or car plant worker (or, indeed, a sprat fisherman who relies on Scandinavian livestock meal plants to buy their catch) then you're just reprehensible.
On the fishing I think EU boats should be allowed but there should not be quota system. Instead the French and other fishing companies should be allowed to compete for a licence to fish in British waters, and that all catches be required to land their catch in British ports. That gives the UK control and supervision.
I am genuinely baffled as to why fishing is so fucking important in all this. It's a tiny fraction of the economy largely practiced by illiterates with missing fingers who probably don't vote anyway.
I've been on a boarding party that went aboard a trawler in the North Sea and it seemed liked the most uncomfortable and degrading way possible to make a living apart from being Alok Sharma.
To be honest that is just ignorant and an insult to all those in fishing communities
It reminds me of the stupidity of the Royal Navy putting a gun on the front of my Father in Laws fishing boat in the last war, along with a wet behind the ears lieutenant tying to tell him what to do, when he was the skipper of one of Scotland's most successful fishing boats
And if you knew the numbers of our family drowned at sea while fishing your inane comment about 'missing two fingers' is breathtaking
You think you are clever but you demonstrate extraordinary ignorance at times
@Dura_Ace has a lot of anger inside him he can't control very well and feels he needs to release, hence the aggressive posts on here, his (self-declared) personal unpleasantness to those he vociferously disagrees with offline, and his dangerous driving.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk
Monaco is much, much wealthier and as a result it does what it wants to do, no more and no less.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1317044556328730625
He's also at least half right. Hard to think of a more shit, dangerous, frightening and unrewarding job (except deep pit coal mining), and for those holistically thinking "But when will the white man realise you cannot eat money?" it seems as a nation we can't eat fish either. We export it.
In the past the UK was stronger than Ireland but in recent years the Celtic Tiger has done very well. Plus they have a trade deficit with us.
I think you will find that to be a niche view.
But the fact the EU is less than the sum of its parts? I don't think an exceptionally niche view.
That is laughable. I have more faith in the Irish than you do it seems.
The DHSC news release also explains why Lancashire is going into tier 3. It says:
In Lancashire, infection rates are among the highest in the country and continuing to rise rapidly. Rates are highest for those aged 16-29 at 552 per 100,000 people, while in the most vulnerable age group, those aged over 60, cases stand at 214 per 100,000 people. This increases to 594 over 100,000 for the over 60s in Burnley and 671 per 100,000 for 16- to 29-year-olds.
Hospitalisations can occur two to three weeks after someone is infected with the virus, meaning we anticipate the number of patients in hospital in Lancashire to rise.
The number of patients with Covid-19 in intensive care beds has reached nearly half the number seen at the height of the pandemic earlier this year, and the latest data suggests there will be more people in mechanical ventilation beds in Lancashire within two weeks than there were in the first wave. This is as a result of infections which have already happened, rather than a prediction – underlining the need for urgent action now to prevent the epidemic in Lancashire rising even further.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/oct/16/uk-coronavirus-live-boris-johnson-local-restrictions-lockdown-tier-2-covid-brexit-latest-updates?page=with:block-5f8979678f0851521938b19e#block-5f8979678f0851521938b19e
One issue was that the British position in international naval law had long been to eliminate any letter-of-marque style stuff. Anything less than military command of weapons was considered bad.
The other was the German legal theory that civilians who fought back were criminals - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Fryatt etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dPzFUiY-tg
Asking Deloitte to set up Test and Trace was a strategic mistake, but I can well believe that govt Ministers thought getting a private sector consultancy in was a good idea and were happy to pay over the odds.
But paying 280k for 6 months work... and then trying to mislead the public by saying it was unpaid... that's just so dodgy.
Surely shutting the pubs etc massively improves Blackpool.
Tory temporary bigger lead has evaporated
Have Tories been down to 39 with YouGov before?
So to lighten the mood here is the peerless Allen - https://youtu.be/BGASvVqzOa0.
We have reached the point where the considered opinion of the experts is that building a new bridge at Hammersmith is impossible.
The sane thing to do would be to get rid of the existing piece of garbage and replace it - if you are upset about the pretty stuff on top, you can stick that back on.
Mind you, the previous "renovation" of the bridge totally changed the nature of the load bearing structure, so you could argue that the existing bridge is a pastiche.
Every time. Every measure. The envelope gets pushed a bit further.
And what if there is no vaccine this Spring? We do it all again next winter?
We are paying the price for this foolishness with gradual national impoverishment.
The subtext of the criticism is that a job in cyber is ... somehow dirty & low-grade & inferior ... compared to a job in ballet.
Not sure who would give us the better deal.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1317058606022492160?s=20
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1317033184224313345
Well done Boris! 🥳
So what would she be doing, aged 30?
Looks like the ball is back in the EU court
And no deal becoming increasingly likely
Macron is more f***ed than a dockyard hooker.
I can see several bilateral micro-deals being done, however.
F*ck business turned out to be the one promise he has ever kept.
In fact, part of the early Hangue and Geneva conventions was to give protection to irregular but organised (?!?) groups under international law, to prevent a repeat of what happened in 1870.
My favourite one, was where the German military, in WWI decided that -
- They needed to invade France via Belgium
- Since they needed to march through Belgium, it was a *crime* for the Belgians to try and stop them. Not just civilians. The Belgian nation was guilty of not acquiescing to the requirements of the Kaisers army....
There will be a deal at the last possible moment. The rest is hype and tactics. When the last possible moment is has already been put back from yesterday.
On BBC News - should this not have been to the HoC?
This is well choreographed panto which, yes, could go on all the way till Christmas.
https://lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/
Easily disprovable, we will see what happens in London over the coming weeks.
Much more interesting was the divergence between Macron and Merkel, and how that plays into Barnier's role.
As a share of the developed world the EU is shrinking. It is sclerotic and failing.
No Deal means there is no Australia-style deal because the latter involves a deal being agreed. Whereas No deal means no deal. Nothing.
Boris lying again about Australian-style deals is par for the course I suppose.
But this was all explained very cogently here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/09/07/fisking-the-pm-examining-the-background-to-his-controversial-eu-move/
See, in particular, points 5 & 6
“5. If there is no FTA between the EU and the U.K. by 31 December 2020, the U.K. will not have a trading arrangement like the one Australia currently has with the EU. It will have no trading arrangement. None. It will, as far as the EU is concerned, be a third country.
6. Australia’s arrangement is not the default. Why? Well, the current trading arrangements are based on the 2008 EU-Australian Partnership Framework, a fancy word for a general agreement to be friends. The key point is that it is an agreement. If Britain leaves the transition period with no agreement, some alternative agreement – whether like the Australian or any other one – does not magic itself into existence. The PM’s statement on this is, bluntly, an untruth.“
This is merely almost completely 100% guaranteed money.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/france-s-war-on-islamist-separatism
Not sure what to make of that.
That one should abandon one's addle-headed dreams of spreading a little joy in this grim world with your beauty, Grace and skill in return for a larger, regular pay cheque from the man.
National wealth in terms of pure pounds and pence.
Wonderful!