He owns this now. The chaos. The medicine shortages. The broken businesses. The lorry parks. The food disruption. The price increases. The whole lot.
F*ck business turned out to be the one promise he has ever kept.
Yes, and anyone who complains that they've lost their job, or their business, will doubtless be told to retrain in cyber and called a snob if they object.
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.
In S Wales, the cases come from local transmission.
In NE Wales, they come from local transmission with some importation.
In W. Wales (Ceredigion, Ynys Mon, Gwynedd), they are mainly imported.
You now need to weight this by population (or cases). Most of the population (and most of the cases) are actually n S Wales & NE Wales. So the disease is being spread in Wales mainly by local transmission.
The exception is in W. Wales where the cases are being mainly imported, such as by the Right Hon Wanker for Rossendale and Darwen
That's quite worrying, up to a third of the previous peak. Substantially over my arse.
Indeed, and puts paid to all the rubbish about "levelling off" that the various head-in-the-sand types have been banging on about for the last week. Johnson should have listened to his scientific advisors last month but he arrogantly chose not to. He's now at least a month behind the pandemic curve and we're heading for a new lockdown because apparently Boris knows best. Just criminal stupidity.
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!
As I pointed out below - at the age of 30 or so, she will very likely need to change careers.
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.
That's quite worrying, up to a third of the previous peak. Substantially over my arse.
Indeed, and puts paid to all the rubbish about "levelling off" that the various head-in-the-sand types have been banging on about for the last week. Johnson should have listened to his scientific advisors last month but he arrogantly chose not to. He's now at least a month behind the pandemic curve and we're heading for a new lockdown because apparently Boris knows best. Just criminal stupidity.
No it doesn't. Levelling off has only fully happened when you reach the peak, if we think that we're approaching the peak now which is what the discussions have been about then an increase should not be a shock.
The survey shows that its gone up by 50% in the week, which matches the predictions of those who thought it was levelling off.
As was pointed out the other day, a good negotiator should never be surprised with the behaviour of their negotiating partner. Upset, possibly. But not surprised. That's the difference between the incompetent placemen we have and the EU negotiating team.
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.
In S Wales, the cases come from local transmission.
In NE Wales, they come from local transmission with some importation.
In W. Wales (Ceredigion, Ynys Mon, Gwynedd), they are mainly imported.
You now need to weight this by population (or cases). Most of the population (and most of the cases) are actually n S Wales & NE Wales. So the disease is being spread in Wales mainly by local transmission.
The exception is in W. Wales where the cases are being mainly imported, such as by the Right Hon Wanker for Rossendale and Darwen
who travelled to Ynys Mon when his wife was infected.
Hm, there is a difference between importation of a specific genome (i.e. strain) fo virus and its subsequent spread. if the virus had not been imported there would be no further cases, ie none at all - however many or however few. That is the politically significant issue, it seems from what I read.
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.
!
Just how many PBers have been injured by DA's dangerous driving?
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
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"
I note that the figure of 20m votes doesn't include New York. Do we have any indication of early voting there? Is it different from other states?
Don't they just weigh the votes in NY?
NY has far more limited mail in voting than most other Dem heavy states, you need a good excuse to vote absentee there. Early voting opens on the 24th according to my notes there too.
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!
Absolute, ludicrous, impoverishing nonsense.
A computer program can be just as graceful & skilful as a piece of ballet. A career in technology or engineering is just as creative and just as satisfying a career in the arts.
There is no implication in the advertisement that Fatima is being forced to abandon her dreams.
She should follow her dreams ... and the advert is saying her dreams could be in tech.
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.
Developed countries are shrinking relative to developing countries. As 'developing' attains 'developed' status the size of the latter grouping grows relative to the former. And each individual developed nation shrinks relative to this greater aggregate. Whether a country is an EU member or not has only a marginal impact. If you wish to argue with any credibility that being in the European Single Market materially hampers growth you have much work to do.
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
The blame game, though, is but a temporary thing. Having blamed the EU, then what?
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
And of course, Australia means we'll all have a bigger house with a swimming pool. And better weather than Canada too. What's not to like?
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.
Developed countries are shrinking relative to developing countries. As 'developing' attains 'developed' the size of the latter grouping grows relative to the former. And each individual developed nation shrinks relative to this greater aggregate. Whether a country is an EU member or not has only a marginal impact. If you wish to argue with any credibility that being in the European Single Market materially hampers growth you have much work to do.
No. Do I need to explain this slower to you?
Comparing the same set of countries - developed of thirty years ago, versus the same set of developed countries today, the sclerotic EU is going backwards not forwards.
That's not comparing the EU against developing nations, but developed ones. Like for like.
Though if your argument now is that wither a country is an EU member ir not has only a marginal impact that would be a reason not to be one.
The only argument after the 'shock' Ipsos indy poll was about whether 'Brave RAF intercepts Russian intruder' or 'The oil is running out' would come first.
'RAF fighter jets from Fife intercept Russian bombers off UK coastline'
"In place of innovative thinking from unionists, we instead have some old and frankly dangerous proposals raising their heads: put devolution back in the bottle; take powers away from Holyrood and back to Westminster; introduce technical gimmickry around turnout levels or majority thresholds so that something more than the traditional “50 per cent plus one” is required.
The surge in support for independence appears to have broken free of party politics – there is a kind of transference taking place. This also happened in 2014, as SNP advisers admitted at the time: the sense that it was legitimate to vote Yes spread from friend to friend, brother to sister, colleague to colleague. Today, it’s not about what the politicians say – who can believe them, any of them, given their track record? It’s about what you see with your own eyes and feel in your own heart. It’s about having had enough – about wanting control, wanting a sympathetic demos and empathetic leadership. It seems to be about hope, and hope, as we know, is contagious.
...
Boris Johnson is not the hero who will save the Union, but the anti-hero who, in attempting to dig out the weeds, is also uprooting the flowers. Scotland is being pushed towards leaving, and so has begun to pull. The centre, it seems, cannot hold."
Boris's statement just shows once again another reason why the UK holds all the cards.
There issues being disputed: Fish and the Level Playing Field (the EU trying to avoid a competitor on their doorstep).
If there's no deal the French don't get our fish. If there's no deal the EU don't get the Level Playing Field.
The EU can only get what they want if there's a deal. We can get what we want if we walk away. If another player can't fold then you hold the cards.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
The blame game, though, is but a temporary thing. Having blamed the EU, then what?
The only argument after the 'shock' Ipsos indy poll was about whether 'Brave RAF intercepts Russian intruder' or 'The oil is running out' would come first.
'RAF fighter jets from Fife intercept Russian bombers off UK coastline'
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.
Easily disprovable, we will see what happens in London over the coming weeks.
Having skimmed the article and briefly listened, it seems plausible. I do think that some people have an inherent cross immunity, that may if not prevent the infection, may limit it (asymptomatic and no antibodies detected). So the threshold for herd immunity is lower. However we clearly do have people still getting ill. the confusion now is about what is a 'case'? Are the hundreds of students testing positive, often with no symptoms, real cases in the medical sense? Or should we have a tighter definition of what represents a Covid case?
Bears listening to for amusement, though. She was spectacularly disdainful of impeccably polite Martha Kearney for 'interrupting' her unresponsive, minutes long replies to questions.
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
The blame game, though, is but a temporary thing. Having blamed the EU, then what?
W e all suffer, of course. But it was not Johnson´s fault - he wasn´t there and didn´t do it. Not a very good excuse from somebody who is supposed to be in charge....
Mind you, there are bound to be some people who do very well out of it.....
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
BJ has had some practice in coming down on a Landing Strip I believe.
I note that the figure of 20m votes doesn't include New York. Do we have any indication of early voting there? Is it different from other states?
Don't they just weigh the votes in NY?
Of course.
But as you can tell from the state percentages, its omission (along with Louisiana, Washington, and some smaller states( means that early voting is closer to 20% generally, not 15%.
That's quite worrying, up to a third of the previous peak. Substantially over my arse.
There is much denial at large. The virus is as dangerous as ever. We have little immunity because not many have had it. I'm coming around to the view that a national circuit breaker is a terrible idea but the best one.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
Boris's statement just shows once again another reason why the UK holds all the cards.
There issues being disputed: Fish and the Level Playing Field (the EU trying to avoid a competitor on their doorstep).
If there's no deal the French don't get our fish. If there's no deal the EU don't get the Level Playing Field.
The EU can only get what they want if there's a deal. We can get what we want if we walk away. If another player can't fold then you hold the cards.
All morning you have been trolling... Its a bit tedious to have so much stupid being sprayed over the site TBH. You cant count and you can only recycle provably ridiculous statements made by the dishonest and faintly delusional Tory spin machine.
Quote from the Guardian, from PM John son's statement "And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
Quote from the Guardian, from PM John son's statement "And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
Has anyone who voted for the Government said they're upset yet?
Or is it the people who couldn't accept defeat in 2016 and 2019 who are still complaining now when the Government does what it was elected to do?
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
Sorry, but its ruined your life and pretty much tipped you into insanity. I've got on with my life, its what us Eurosceptics have spent years working towards. You'll feel better when you're at peace with what has happened rather than trawling twitter for reassuring angry voices from your echo chamber.
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!
Absolute, ludicrous, impoverishing nonsense.
A computer program can be just as graceful & skilful as a piece of ballet. A career in technology or engineering is just as creative and just as satisfying a career in the arts.
There is no implication in the advertisement that Fatima is being forced to abandon her dreams.
She should follow her dreams ... and the advert is saying her dreams could be in tech.
I'm afraid we aren't going to see eye to eye on this one. Seldom do you pack a theatre to admire some coding. And if her dreams are in tech she hasn't dressed for it. Satisfying is in the eye of the beholder. If everyone's dream was to earn the biggest possible pay cheque society was be impoverished at a frightening rate. There'd be nobody to teach kids for just a start. Indeed there'd be no one to teach Fatima.
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
I wonder what Humble Pie tastes like? We might all be getting served a portion in January
Quote from the Guardian, from PM John son's statement "And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
Has anyone who voted for the Government said they're upset yet?
Or is it the people who couldn't accept defeat in 2016 and 2019 who are still complaining now when the Government does what it was elected to do?
Big G has had his moments. Of course today is not one of them, but another moment will come around fairly shortly I'm sure.
Quote from the Guardian, from PM John son's statement "And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
He doesn't speak for me that's for sure. It's utter bollocks.
You'll feel better when you're at peace with what has happened rather than trawling twitter for reassuring angry voices from your echo chamber.
Hold on to that quote...
It might help you in January
How I laugh that 12 months ago you thought Brexit was over and you're still making nonsense predictions. I'll enjoy January just like I'm currently enjoying the negotiations.
I'm wary of rumour-mongering either way, but a trusted friend who is a volunteer in a vaccine trial in Nottingham tells me, "They say it is looking very promising. They hope to start vaccinating health care workers around Christmas, then it will be the over 80s, then the over 70s, and so on, with a general roll out around early spring. So there is definitely room for optimism."
Question for pharma people - this sounds excellent, but does it make any sense? When I worked in pharma, they didn't peek at the results till the trials were finished (and my friend is still having regular tests so it's not). And if they're not finished, is it conceivable that people will be getting vaccinations by Christmas?
Quote from the Guardian, from PM John son's statement "And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
Has anyone who voted for the Government said they're upset yet?
Or is it the people who couldn't accept defeat in 2016 and 2019 who are still complaining now when the Government does what it was elected to do?
Dozens of us, you are just too busy posting bollocks to pay attention.
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
It's 1. Not only would it be beyond loony even for this government to crash out in acrimony, the statement Boris made is quite explicit that he is still desperate for a deal:
".. of course we're willing to discuss the practicalities with our friends - where a lot of progress has already been made, by the way, on such issues as social security, and aviation, nuclear cooperation, and so on."
All of which progress is still on offer, provided he implements the Withdrawal Agreement in full, removes the offending clauses from the Internal Market Bill, signs up the level playing-field arrangements, and allows EU fishermen to continue fishing in British waters.
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
I wonder what Humble Pie tastes like? We might all be getting served a portion in January
We absolutely won't. The non-existence of the GVMS or the customs officials to run it will absolutely be the fault of the EU. Their dastardly efforts to distract us with negotiations is why we have utterly failed to create the infrastructure needed to go WTO.
Anyway, they have promised to pay the vast billions in red tape that UK businesses will be tied up in once eventually we actually have the ability to run an actual border.
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!
Absolute, ludicrous, impoverishing nonsense.
A computer program can be just as graceful & skilful as a piece of ballet. A career in technology or engineering is just as creative and just as satisfying a career in the arts.
There is no implication in the advertisement that Fatima is being forced to abandon her dreams.
She should follow her dreams ... and the advert is saying her dreams could be in tech.
I'm afraid we aren't going to see eye to eye on this one. Seldom do you pack a theatre to admire some coding. And if her dreams are in tech she hasn't dressed for it. Satisfying is in the eye of the beholder. If everyone's dream was to earn the biggest possible pay cheque society was be impoverished at a frightening rate. There'd be nobody to teach kids for just a start. Indeed there'd be no one to teach Fatima.
And bluntly, whilst there are polymaths who are good at both, what if Fatima's talents aren't in the mathematical thinking behind cyber?
In the same way that I'd make a terrible ballet dancer.
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.
Developed countries are shrinking relative to developing countries. As 'developing' attains 'developed' the size of the latter grouping grows relative to the former. And each individual developed nation shrinks relative to this greater aggregate. Whether a country is an EU member or not has only a marginal impact. If you wish to argue with any credibility that being in the European Single Market materially hampers growth you have much work to do.
No. Do I need to explain this slower to you?
Comparing the same set of countries - developed of thirty years ago, versus the same set of developed countries today, the sclerotic EU is going backwards not forwards.
That's not comparing the EU against developing nations, but developed ones. Like for like.
Though if your argument now is that wither a country is an EU member ir not has only a marginal impact that would be a reason not to be one.
Not slower, you need to make a start. The proposition you table is -
EU membership has materially reduced the growth of its constituent member states.
I'm wary of rumour-mongering either way, but a trusted friend who is a volunteer in a vaccine trial in Nottingham tells me, "They say it is looking very promising. They hope to start vaccinating health care workers around Christmas, then it will be the over 80s, then the over 70s, and so on, with a general roll out around early spring. So there is definitely room for optimism."
Question for pharma people - this sounds excellent, but does it make any sense? When I worked in pharma, they didn't peek at the results till the trials were finished (and my friend is still having regular tests so it's not). And if they're not finished, is it conceivable that people will be getting vaccinations by Christmas?
Surely it's double or triple blind. How would he/she know?
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
It's 1. Not only would it be beyond loony even for even this government to crash out in acrimony, the statement Boris made is quite explicit that he is still desperate for a deal:
".. of course we're willing to discuss the practicalities with our friends - where a lot of progress has already been made, by the way, on such issues as social security, and aviation, nuclear cooperation, and so on."
All of which progress is still on offer, provided he implements the Withdrawal Agreement in full, removes the offending clauses from the Internal Market Bill, signs up the level playing-filed arrangements, and allows EU fishermen to continue fishing in British waters.
EU fishermen? In our waters? With the access rights that we sold them? An outrage sir, why do you hate Britain so much?
Hmm, this could be quite clever. Boris caves in and rebrands his cave-in as a 'Australia-style' cave-in rather than a 'Canada-style' cave-in. That will please the loons, and also has the great advantage that the chaos in January (now inevitable even with any kind of deal at all) can be blamed on the EU unreasonably not giving him his 'Canada-style' deal.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
An excellent turn of events, the nice pubs will get a little time off to be refurbished to serve only domestically made Carling Special Brew and we can spend 2021 getting bladdered from morning till night.
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.
Developed countries are shrinking relative to developing countries. As 'developing' attains 'developed' the size of the latter grouping grows relative to the former. And each individual developed nation shrinks relative to this greater aggregate. Whether a country is an EU member or not has only a marginal impact. If you wish to argue with any credibility that being in the European Single Market materially hampers growth you have much work to do.
No. Do I need to explain this slower to you?
Comparing the same set of countries - developed of thirty years ago, versus the same set of developed countries today, the sclerotic EU is going backwards not forwards.
That's not comparing the EU against developing nations, but developed ones. Like for like.
Though if your argument now is that wither a country is an EU member ir not has only a marginal impact that would be a reason not to be one.
Not slower, you need to make a start. The proposition you make is -
EU membership has materially reduced the growth of its constituent member states.
Go for it.
OK here we go: Developed EU member states have declined relative to developed non-EU members.
That means either the EU is a drag on its members states, in which case we're right to leave. Or it means that EU membership is inconsequential to growth, in which case we're not wrong to leave.
Which do you think it is? Heads I win, tails you lose.
An excellent turn of events, the nice pubs will get a little time off to be refurbished to serve only domestically made Carling Special Brew and we can spend 2021 getting bladdered from morning till night.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
The reaction of GBP/EUR is quite informative. The immediate drop of half a cent in less than a minute on Boris's announcement tells us who is (more) fucked if there is no deal. The subsequent rapid rebound tells us how seriously Boris's statements should be taken.
Meanwhile in the US... Trump and the GOP really do seem to be heading towards the shellacking of the century. The number of Republican stalwarts, from Cindy McCain to the daughter of the increasingly embattled Rudy Guiliani are coming out for Biden. So the question is if AZ, FL, MI, WI etc are all flipping, where does it stop? SC is still in the likely Republican column, but it doesn`t look that likely to me.
I'm wary of rumour-mongering either way, but a trusted friend who is a volunteer in a vaccine trial in Nottingham tells me, "They say it is looking very promising. They hope to start vaccinating health care workers around Christmas, then it will be the over 80s, then the over 70s, and so on, with a general roll out around early spring. So there is definitely room for optimism."
Question for pharma people - this sounds excellent, but does it make any sense? When I worked in pharma, they didn't peek at the results till the trials were finished (and my friend is still having regular tests so it's not). And if they're not finished, is it conceivable that people will be getting vaccinations by Christmas?
Surely it's double or triple blind. How would he/she know?
How will I get past the huge queue for the influenza jab to get into the queue for the covid jab?
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
It's 1. Not only would it be beyond loony even for even this government to crash out in acrimony, the statement Boris made is quite explicit that he is still desperate for a deal:
".. of course we're willing to discuss the practicalities with our friends - where a lot of progress has already been made, by the way, on such issues as social security, and aviation, nuclear cooperation, and so on."
All of which progress is still on offer, provided he implements the Withdrawal Agreement in full, removes the offending clauses from the Internal Market Bill, signs up the level playing-filed arrangements, and allows EU fishermen to continue fishing in British waters.
EU fishermen? In our waters? With the access rights that we sold them? An outrage sir, why do you hate Britain so much?
French quotas were not bought from us. If you still don't understand that you need to learn the difference.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
An excellent turn of events, the nice pubs will get a little time off to be refurbished to serve only domestically made Carling Special Brew and we can spend 2021 getting bladdered from morning till night.
Not after 10! Or with anyone you know.
That type of drinking doesn't require friends or any sense of the time of day.
So is this Shagger trying to apply the final bit of pressure on the EU? They probably can't believe that we think they think this will affect them.
So two scenarios: 1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus 2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
I wonder what Humble Pie tastes like? We might all be getting served a portion in January
Deer guts. Which might be all that that is in the shops.
Such a change under David Frost from the May days. Feels like we're calling the shots and the pace of the talks these days and getting our statements out quicker than the EU. 18 months ago it felt like they were controlling the talks and the briefings. Never felt happier with the negotiations than the last few weeks.
Like when the EU said they would not and could not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement, until they did.
There are always some Belgian communists holding up the deal until there's a deal. I don't know why EU negotiations are always like this, it's bloody tedious watching the two sides playing these games.
The reaction of GBP/EUR is quite informative. The immediate drop of half a cent in less than a minute on Boris's announcement tells us who is (more) fucked if there is no deal. The subsequent rapid rebound tells us how seriously Boris's statements should be taken.
Sterling falling doesn't make us fucked it makes our exporters more competitive. So our exporters may face some tariffs but the exchange rate change cancels that out.
On the other hand EU exporters to the UK face the double whammy of a currency fluctuation and tariffs too.
Comments
In NE Wales, they come from local transmission with some importation.
In W. Wales (Ceredigion, Ynys Mon, Gwynedd), they are mainly imported.
You now need to weight this by population (or cases). Most of the population (and most of the cases) are actually n S Wales & NE Wales. So the disease is being spread in Wales mainly by local transmission.
The exception is in W. Wales where the cases are being mainly imported, such as by the Right Hon Wanker for Rossendale and Darwen
https://www.northwaleschronicle.co.uk/news/18449366.mp-jake-berry-living-second-home-anglesey/
who travelled to Ynys Mon when his wife was infected.
There issues being disputed: Fish and the Level Playing Field (the EU trying to avoid a competitor on their doorstep).
If there's no deal the French don't get our fish.
If there's no deal the EU don't get the Level Playing Field.
The EU can only get what they want if there's a deal. We can get what we want if we walk away. If another player can't fold then you hold the cards.
This way when there is a deal he can say the EU moved !
The survey shows that its gone up by 50% in the week, which matches the predictions of those who thought it was levelling off.
It's a narrow landing zone, to be sure, but you can see why he would try to go for it, having stupidly boxed himself in to the extent he has.
Hospitalizations haven't gone up much... yet...
https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/coronavirus--covid-19--cases
A computer program can be just as graceful & skilful as a piece of ballet. A career in technology or engineering is just as creative and just as satisfying a career in the arts.
There is no implication in the advertisement that Fatima is being forced to abandon her dreams.
She should follow her dreams ... and the advert is saying her dreams could be in tech.
What's not to like?
Comparing the same set of countries - developed of thirty years ago, versus the same set of developed countries today, the sclerotic EU is going backwards not forwards.
That's not comparing the EU against developing nations, but developed ones. Like for like.
Though if your argument now is that wither a country is an EU member ir not has only a marginal impact that would be a reason not to be one.
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1317008627438374917?s=20
The only argument after the 'shock' Ipsos indy poll was about whether 'Brave RAF intercepts Russian intruder' or 'The oil is running out' would come first.
'RAF fighter jets from Fife intercept Russian bombers off UK coastline'
https://tinyurl.com/y49hp4xd
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2020/10/scotland-has-never-been-closer-independence-and-boris-johnson-blame
"In place of innovative thinking from unionists, we instead have some old and frankly dangerous proposals raising their heads: put devolution back in the bottle; take powers away from Holyrood and back to Westminster; introduce technical gimmickry around turnout levels or majority thresholds so that something more than the traditional “50 per cent plus one” is required.
The surge in support for independence appears to have broken free of party politics – there is a kind of transference taking place. This also happened in 2014, as SNP advisers admitted at the time: the sense that it was legitimate to vote Yes spread from friend to friend, brother to sister, colleague to colleague. Today, it’s not about what the politicians say – who can believe them, any of them, given their track record? It’s about what you see with your own eyes and feel in your own heart. It’s about having had enough – about wanting control, wanting a sympathetic demos and empathetic leadership. It seems to be about hope, and hope, as we know, is contagious.
...
Boris Johnson is not the hero who will save the Union, but the anti-hero who, in attempting to dig out the weeds, is also uprooting the flowers. Scotland is being pushed towards leaving, and so has begun to pull. The centre, it seems, cannot hold."
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1317059604782735360
It's worked so far.
She was spectacularly disdainful of impeccably polite Martha Kearney for 'interrupting' her unresponsive, minutes long replies to questions.
e all suffer, of course. But it was not Johnson´s fault - he wasn´t there and didn´t do it. Not a very good excuse from somebody who is supposed to be in charge....
Mind you, there are bound to be some people who do very well out of it.....
But as you can tell from the state percentages, its omission (along with Louisiana, Washington, and some smaller states( means that early voting is closer to 20% generally, not 15%.
At that rate we will reach previous peak by 6th November.
To my untrained eye it looks to be accelerating vs. growth in September or at least growing at the same rate.
One day you will realise that.
If you're lucky.
"And so with high hearts and with complete confidence, we will prepare to embrace the alternative and we will prosper mightily as an independent free trading nation controlling our own borders, our fisheries and setting our own laws."
One has to admit that the first phrase doesn't seem to fit all hearts and minds here.
https://youtu.be/8ZToP48Mrp8
Or is it the people who couldn't accept defeat in 2016 and 2019 who are still complaining now when the Government does what it was elected to do?
So two scenarios:
1. As @Richard_Nabavi suggests this is a repositioning so that when we cave he can frame it as a massive triumph. We accept pretty much what the EU has on the table, but branded as an "Australia deal". No problems in January as the UK uses its sovereignty to maintain existing standards and customs arrangements. We have the right to have babies and the box is ready to receive the foetus
2. We are going to call our bluff. Go WTO from 1st January with our non-existent infrastructure. Advice will quickly be issued to exporters to not only prep their drivers for a week's holiday in a Kent carpark but to stop exporting at all. For patriotic reasons.
Seldom do you pack a theatre to admire some coding.
And if her dreams are in tech she hasn't dressed for it.
Satisfying is in the eye of the beholder.
If everyone's dream was to earn the biggest possible pay cheque society was be impoverished at a frightening rate.
There'd be nobody to teach kids for just a start. Indeed there'd be no one to teach Fatima.
It might help you in January
Of course today is not one of them, but another moment will come around fairly shortly I'm sure.
Question for pharma people - this sounds excellent, but does it make any sense? When I worked in pharma, they didn't peek at the results till the trials were finished (and my friend is still having regular tests so it's not). And if they're not finished, is it conceivable that people will be getting vaccinations by Christmas?
The more you are going to keep on talking, the more you have to say "it's over".
The weaker and less prepared you are, the more you have to go on about being strong and ready.
".. of course we're willing to discuss the practicalities with our friends - where a lot of progress has already been made, by the way, on such issues as social security, and aviation, nuclear cooperation, and so on."
All of which progress is still on offer, provided he implements the Withdrawal Agreement in full, removes the offending clauses from the Internal Market Bill, signs up the level playing-field arrangements, and allows EU fishermen to continue fishing in British waters.
Anyway, they have promised to pay the vast billions in red tape that UK businesses will be tied up in once eventually we actually have the ability to run an actual border.
In the same way that I'd make a terrible ballet dancer.
EU membership has materially reduced the growth of its constituent member states.
Go for it.
That means either the EU is a drag on its members states, in which case we're right to leave.
Or it means that EU membership is inconsequential to growth, in which case we're not wrong to leave.
Which do you think it is? Heads I win, tails you lose.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-54566566
Fire Breaker, Circuit Breaker, Tier 3....its all getting very silly.
On the other hand EU exporters to the UK face the double whammy of a currency fluctuation and tariffs too.
POEUWAS.