The point that was clear was leave, the other details may need democratic clarification too, in the form of a GE on what negotiating stance to take.
Indeed.
And in 3 months, Theresa May going to the country on a platform of single market access with free movement to stabilise the economy would win in a landslide.
Andrea Leadsom on a platform of closed borders, no £350m, and economic chaos, would lose to Jeremy Corbyn
You are delusional.
Leadsom just won a majority of the nation backing precisely that.
Unfortunately Scott is right. We can't have any leavers at the top. They are bound by Gove's stupid campaign promises, we can't restrict free movement without leaving the single market. Leadsom and the other leave leaders promised the impossible. We need a grown up to tell it how it is.
No we need a Leaver at the top to fight for as much as is possible of that promised and compromise on the rest then tell the country they did the best they could. Take responsibility from start to finish and then be judged accordingly.
A Remainer who is willing to compromise on everything immediately will get the worst possible deal.
Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free?
We'll lose 2020 to a sensible Labour candidate with a leaver in charge.
You will lose in 2020 when 30 seats go to the kippers if you have a remainer in charge that gives a EEA+ just-about-out-but-not-really solution.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
The point that was clear was leave, the other details may need democratic clarification too, in the form of a GE on what negotiating stance to take.
Indeed.
And in 3 months, Theresa May going to the country on a platform of single market access with free movement to stabilise the economy would win in a landslide.
Andrea Leadsom on a platform of closed borders, no £350m, and economic chaos, would lose to Jeremy Corbyn
You are delusional.
Leadsom just won a majority of the nation backing precisely that.
Unfortunately Scott is right. We can't have any leavers at the top. They are bound by Gove's stupid campaign promises, we can't restrict free movement without leaving the single market. Leadsom and the other leave leaders promised the impossible. We need a grown up to tell it how it is.
If the new leader came back from Brussels with a deal for associate membership with restrictions on freedom of movement but full market access and continuing participation in the institutions would you think she was a hero or a villain? Such a deal would be way more popular than the EEA.
Villain. I want an economic partnership, not a political one.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
London is London. Trying to hand wave away bits of London that don't suit doesnt wash.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Ah, I see. So the London that will vote to be a City State will start its life by shedding its outer boroughs. Thanks for the clarification.
London will not be a city state but inner London is like Manhattan and the Bronx. The only areas the socially conservative right and the GOP does well in in NYC is in outer boroughs like Staten Island and Queens
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
I had a Brexity moment today. Walking down Parkway, Camden I passed a well-fed, colourful Roma woman, selling the Big Issue. Probably from Bulgaria or Romania. it's well known that they come here to sell the Big Issue, so they can then get tax credits as "self employed". they come here TO be homeless, and claim
In a perverse way I'm now hoping Trump is victorious in the US, because that would at least suggest that we don't have the monopoly on cretinous bigots. But, either way, Britain's reputation as a nation of fair play and tolerance is in tatters.
We'd that chappy from Wetherspoons too with his beermats. If ever there was a David vs Goliath triumph it was Brexit.
Miss. P., I wrote to an American chum last week that we had just had a peasants' revolt the first since the 14th century. I made that comment with tongue firmly in cheek. However, as this last week has progressed, and particularly as I read the comments on here, I am not sure I wasn't correct.
I'll have to think about it some more, but just look at who is going on about the disaster the vote will bring down on us. It ain't those who have little. Perhaps some of the undoubted ire is caused by the fact that the "little people" have had the temerity to vote against their masters.
If you read last night, it was leavers who were saying it would be a disaster if we tried to control immigration, despite that being one of the cornerstones of the leave campaign.
As for the rest of your paragraph: I'm not sure Charles, RCS, Max, Richard Tyndall etc are the "little people" of this country!
RCS wants EEA for his digital business, I believe Max has a certain City based view. IIRC Charles has taken the high ground re whole populous, and Mr Tyndall isn't bothered about immigration.
You've not mentioned @Tykejohnno or @another_richard or me or many others. We're more representative of provincial Britain.
I noticed your impassioned posts FTP about respecting what the demos believed they were voting for/it wasn't a cleverdick FoM fudge.
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
420 per square kilometer is 50m x 50m per head, which is a very generous amount of space. If people were feeling pressure from actual population density, they'd be moving out to the countryside in large numbers. In reality people want to live where other people are living, which is why they move together to cities, where the population density is higher.
In any case this has nothing to do with schools and hospitals and barely anything to do with infrastructure. These things are just not particularly constrained by space. They're constrained by the cost of paying people to build them and work on them, which scales great with higher population density.
Britain does have a shortage of space for housing where people actually want to live, but that's entirely driven by regulation. US cities like San Francisco have shown they're perfectly capable of creating the same problem despite their country being nearly empty.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
One undoubted benefit of the Leave vote is that the government's entire fiscal and economic policy has been abandoned, so demonstrating what a sham it was in the first place.
Yes, deficit reduction, the mantra of the last 6 years, suddenly not necessary. If it was so important until now, why is it not important any more ?
The entire policy was a fraud to attack the welfare state. It was led by dogma and had very little to do with economics.
With that and the £350m a week we can look forward to the return of the post-war consensus, the cradle to grave welfare state and NHS glasses for everyone, even if they don't need them.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
So it wasn't the "little people" that voted for Leave then, must have been all those rich bankers and city types after all ? The paternalism is breathtaking, it implies that they didn't vote for what they "really wanted" and had they been better guided by their betters would have made a different choice.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Ah, I see. So the London that will vote to be a City State will start its life by shedding its outer boroughs. Thanks for the clarification.
London will not be a city state but inner London is like Manhattan and the Bronx. The only areas the socially conservative right and the GOP does well in in NYC is in outer boroughs like Staten Island and Queens
So either London is a city, all of it, in which case your post is meaningless. Or you are arguing that the Outer Boroughs are somehow less significant. Which is it?
"So we will soon be faced with this question: do we as a nation hate foreigners sufficiently to deny ourselves access to the single market? This might easily be rephrased as: is Britain too racist to be a leading nation in a modern globalised world? However one puts it, it’s a question that will soon need to be resolved because, as we stand, the future PM has no mandate on what sort of Brexit to negotiate." Ishiguro in FT.
Call me a bigot, but I struggle to picture a Leaver as anything other than a shaven-headed school skiver with cobweb tattoos on his neck or a shuffling bloke in a crumpled blazer with a toothbrush moustache. I'm sure there must be some Leavers who aren't only to be found on society's desolate fringe, but it's just that I've never met one.
Ashcroft's poll is just a poll (*spit*!). It does do a little bit of myth-busting - 43% of ABs voted Leave. It confirms others: older people were more likely to vote Leave, graduates more likely to want Remain.
I'd just like to make a point (based on figures from the 2006 DfES report). High numbers of graduates are a recent phenomenon. Only 3.4% of the 1950 cohort went into higher education. It was 8.4% in 1970, 19.3% in 1990.
It used to be perfectly possible to succeed in life without a degree. My siblings and I went to a grammar school and left in the late 70s/early 80s. Only around 20% of the sixth form went to university.
My family (impeccably working class) was unusual in that two of us went to university. My youngest sister (indisputably the most intelligent in our family) has only A-levels to her name (I took a 1st, my other sis a 2:1).
You make some good points. I don't have a degree, and I'm not sure it's done me much harm. In some ways it has helped; in others it has hindered. All in all I'd say it's neutral (though it helped that I went to uni and broadened my experience, just didn't finish the course).
But I do think that we as a society are putting too much emphasis on degrees. As (I think) Mr Llama has said passim, we should be looking at less people going to uni, and more into technical colleges and the like.
It'd all be different if I was in charge. Worse, but different.
I didn't actually get my degree until I was 41. Post the .com bust the world had changed, and I suffered for a couple of years .
It's just slightly irked me that we have this meme of "ill educated oldies took us out of the EU" that I've seen.
I can't accept the argument that people have become more intelligent in the space of fifty years. A lot of middle-aged people would waltz their way to a 2:1 or better if they were to bother.
On your main points, I completely agree. We've perpetrated another con job on the young. For some degrees the graduate premium has completely disappeared and (iirc) for some types of degree it's actually a graduate deficit.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The majority of voters.
They will pay at the ballot box if the try to obstruct. Remainers would be best advised to accept the result and try to influence implementation rather than impede it.
If Leadsom gets it we're in trouble, nowhere near enough experience for the most challenging period we have had for a long time. It's ideological again and look where ideology has got us. What happened to proper conservatism, doing what works and what is the stable option? The clue's in the name, people. all i see now are ideologues with their pet ideas that they seek to foist on people. I wish we weren't in such a chaotic position and having to make such a choice but, if it has to be anyone, a pragmatist is needed (and labour should heed that advice as well). I'm glad the Telegraoh deleted that article but what were they thinking?
I think we could do with a fresh start and Leadsom can provide that.
Putting aside my preference for a Leaver like Leadsom, I think we're overdue for a reset. Labour are still fighting over Blairites et al too.
I'm hoping we've reached a watershed in terms of addressing a lot of ignored issues - most of which are deliberate blind-eyeing by the media and Establishment. It'll be a lot healthier to deal with them, than name call those who object.
Too many in our political class are serving themselves, not those who elected them.
I agree. One benefit from Leadsom is i expect a clear out of the cabinet duffers and sychophants. We see an end to Osborne's mates.
Day 9 - Tyson reaches Phase 2 or 3 within the (5 or 7) stages of grieving - Anger....
Tyson is just a whining maggot infesting the rotten apple core that is the EU. The sooner he decides to leave the UK permanently the better.
Bit harsh Richard!!
Not at all , he is like a broken record and does not even live in the country.
Right...I live in a beautiful flat, part of a Tuscan Villa, in the Tuscan Hills, overlooking the City of Florence. We normally lend it to friends and family when we are away....sadly, I have had to cancel 2 invitations to Brexiters, my Brexit brother and his Brexit family, and a Brexit friend (well ex) after last week. I want a Brexit free life, a Brexit free home, a Brexit free area, Brexitless friends, including family.
Contrary to what Plato thinks I have some very dear friends who are staunch Tories....but Brexit sadly, is a bridge too far.
I think in the future the word Brexit will be as contemptuous and vile as the movement behind it. It will be synonymous with nihilism, racism, populism, reactionary right wing ideologues, hate and negativity.
Liar Liar Pants On Fire
You've said here more than once that you'd never knowingly be friends with a Tory.
No- I said I could never have a long term intimate relationship with an ideological female right wing zealot. I find them particularly unattractive. But I guess the feeling would be mutual so no love lost. My oldest and dearest friend is a staunch, libertarian Tory right winger who probably would never admit to me if he voted Brexit or not.
Tyson "No- I said I could never have a long term intimate relationship with an ideological female right wing zealot. I find them particularly unattractive."
Q: Do they have a peculiar smell or have features that repell you or are you just a sad inadequate man?
He fantasised about me in a threesome with Anne Coulter and Katie Hopkins - I think he needs help.
He certainly does need help. What kind of right wing female threesome doesn't include Edwina Currie?
I had a Brexity moment today. Walking down Parkway, Camden I passed a well-fed, colourful Roma woman, selling the Big Issue. Probably from Bulgaria or Romania. it's well known that they come here to sell the Big Issue, so they can then get tax credits as "self employed". they come here TO be homeless, and claim
"So we will soon be faced with this question: do we as a nation hate foreigners sufficiently to deny ourselves access to the single market? This might easily be rephrased as: is Britain too racist to be a leading nation in a modern globalised world? However one puts it, it’s a question that will soon need to be resolved because, as we stand, the future PM has no mandate on what sort of Brexit to negotiate." Ishiguro in FT.
Call me a bigot, but I struggle to picture a Leaver as anything other than a shaven-headed school skiver with cobweb tattoos on his neck or a shuffling bloke in a crumpled blazer with a toothbrush moustache. I'm sure there must be some Leavers who aren't only to be found on society's desolate fringe, but it's just that I've never met one.
But somehow they make 52% of the voting public. Doesn't sound like a fringe group to me.
Ashcroft's poll is just a poll (*spit*!). It does do a little bit of myth-busting - 43% of ABs voted Leave. It confirms others: older people were more likely to vote Leave, graduates more likely to want Remain.
I'd just like to make a point (based on figures from the 2006 DfES report). High numbers of graduates are a recent phenomenon. Only 3.4% of the 1950 cohort went into higher education. It was 8.4% in 1970, 19.3% in 1990.
It used to be perfectly possible to succeed in life without a degree. My siblings and I went to a grammar school and left in the late 70s/early 80s. Only around 20% of the sixth form went to university.
My family (impeccably working class) was unusual in that two of us went to university. My youngest sister (indisputably the most intelligent in our family) has only A-levels to her name (I took a 1st, my other sis a 2:1).
You make some good points. I don't have a degree, and I'm not sure it's done me much harm. In some ways it has helped; in others it has hindered. All in all I'd say it's neutral (though it helped that I went to uni and broadened my experience, just didn't finish the course).
But I do think that we as a society are putting too much emphasis on degrees. As (I think) Mr Llama has said passim, we should be looking at less people going to uni, and more into technical colleges and the like.
It'd all be different if I was in charge. Worse, but different.
That was indeed mr, Mr. Jessop. I am surprised, and gratified, that you remembered. I don't want to rehearse the whole argument here, but I do believe that more emphasis on apprenticeships, articled clerks (for the professions), and technical education from the age of 14 would be of greater benefit to all concerned that having this "rule" that 50% should go to university.
"Yep, that is true. Outside of the nationalist right the reaction abroad seems to have been one of complete astonishment. Outside the UK the mainstream opinion is that the vote was a ludicrous act of self-harm. It is now up to the Leavers to show that is wrong, while also delivering on the promises made during the campaign. Very soon we will have a cabinet dominated by Leave Tories, so a start will hopefully be made."
*****
Foreigners simply don't understand the immigration issue.
I did some number crunching on Twitter today, and worked it out, and here's how I put it:
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
Compare with other countries. For France (population density 194) to feel the same "pressure", they’d be taking 1.3 million migrants a year. 1.3 MILLION. Every single YEAR.
For Spain to feel the same pressure they’d be taking 1 million. Every year.
For America, the equivalent is 19 million migrants. Every year. NINETEEN MILLION
In that light, Brexit is no surprise. What is surprising is that England has not elected a Fascist government already
I don't think actual overcrowding has been much of a factor in the referendum, given that, in England at least, the mostly densely populated areas largely voted for Remain, while the Leave vote was strongest in rural areas. This is the opposite to what your thesis would suggest.
"So we will soon be faced with this question: do we as a nation hate foreigners sufficiently to deny ourselves access to the single market? This might easily be rephrased as: is Britain too racist to be a leading nation in a modern globalised world? However one puts it, it’s a question that will soon need to be resolved because, as we stand, the future PM has no mandate on what sort of Brexit to negotiate." Ishiguro in FT.
Call me a bigot, but I struggle to picture a Leaver as anything other than a shaven-headed school skiver with cobweb tattoos on his neck or a shuffling bloke in a crumpled blazer with a toothbrush moustache. I'm sure there must be some Leavers who aren't only to be found on society's desolate fringe, but it's just that I've never met one.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Ah, I see. So the London that will vote to be a City State will start its life by shedding its outer boroughs. Thanks for the clarification.
London will not be a city state but inner London is like Manhattan and the Bronx. The only areas the socially conservative right and the GOP does well in in NYC is in outer boroughs like Staten Island and Queens
So either London is a city, all of it, in which case your post is meaningless. Or you are arguing that the Outer Boroughs are somehow less significant. Which is it?
Technically the Outer Boroughs are in London but culturally and demographically many of them have more in common with suburban Essex and Kent than they do with inner city London
I had a Brexity moment today. Walking down Parkway, Camden I passed a well-fed, colourful Roma woman, selling the Big Issue. Probably from Bulgaria or Romania. it's well known that they come here to sell the Big Issue, so they can then get tax credits as "self employed". they come here TO be homeless, and claim
For a second the thought zipped across my mind, of walking up to her, and saying "Ok love, you've had your fun, now could you please go home"
Because these people really ARE taking the piss.
Of course I didn't. I smiled at her and walked on. But that tiny fleeting thought did occur. I can see why there have been flashpoints.
If we fix our benefits system that problem goes away.
And one benefit of the shock in the vote is that NOW is the time to fix our benefits system - as you could argue that those who receive the benefits have asked for them to be changed....
The government really does need to get Frank Field and IDS alongside others who care about these things to sit down asap and work out how to make our benefits system both fair and based on contributions rather than automatic.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
This is a novel idea. So if Labour win the general election in 2020 will they say "wait a minute chaps, we might have got 330 seats, but the Tories still got 270, so just to be fair to everyone, maybe we better pass 41% Tory policies during our term". I can see that working.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
Q: With lower immigration are the "little people" going to see less housing, fewer GPs, fewer school places etc available to them? A: No.
Given how dependent housebuilding, healthcare and teaching are on migrant labour it's not clear cut. Reform benefits to get the chancers out and shift immigration to higher paid jobs.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
Indeed. It does beg the question of what is 'London'. Is it the geography and buildings. Clearly not - cities are people. But which people? In defining London for voting purposes, we say it is those who live (or register as living) within its geographic boundaries. But in a more real sense, London includes all who work there too.
I wonder how 'London' voted in that sense, the aggregate of all those who live and work in there. I imaging that was a closer run thing.
"So we will soon be faced with this question: do we as a nation hate foreigners sufficiently to deny ourselves access to the single market? This might easily be rephrased as: is Britain too racist to be a leading nation in a modern globalised world? However one puts it, it’s a question that will soon need to be resolved because, as we stand, the future PM has no mandate on what sort of Brexit to negotiate." Ishiguro in FT.
Call me a bigot, but I struggle to picture a Leaver as anything other than a shaven-headed school skiver with cobweb tattoos on his neck or a shuffling bloke in a crumpled blazer with a toothbrush moustache. I'm sure there must be some Leavers who aren't only to be found on society's desolate fringe, but it's just that I've never met one.
Apparently there are 17m of them, presumably they dont all have skinheads and tattoos.
You're a bigot, and you have a piss poor opinion of your own countrymen. Ever considered a career in politics
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
420 per square kilometer is 50m x 50m per head, which is a very generous amount of space. If people were feeling pressure from actual population density, they'd be moving out to the countryside in large numbers. In reality people want to live where other people are living, which is why they move together to cities, where the population density is higher.
In any case this has nothing to do with schools and hospitals and barely anything to do with infrastructure. These things are just not particularly constrained by space. They're constrained by the cost of paying people to build them and work on them, which scales great with higher population density.
Britain does have a shortage of space for housing where people actually want to live, but that's entirely driven by regulation. US cities like San Francisco have shown they're perfectly capable of creating the same problem despite their country being nearly empty.
Yep. Let people build upwards, mixed neted/purchase, so we can live affordably. Sorry about the skyline, but affordable life vs. traditional view is not even a close decision.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
Majorities, especially small ones, crushing minorities is certainly not democracy.
There really is a sense that England is full up - or close to it. We can't simply keep importing more and more people, and think it won't affect the quality of life of those already here. It will and it has.
There may be that sense, but it's nothing to do with population density per square kilometer.
I had a Brexity moment today. Walking down Parkway, Camden I passed a well-fed, colourful Roma woman, selling the Big Issue. Probably from Bulgaria or Romania. it's well known that they come here to sell the Big Issue, so they can then get tax credits as "self employed". they come here TO be homeless, and claim
For a second the thought zipped across my mind, of walking up to her, and saying "Ok love, you've had your fun, now could you please go home"
Because these people really ARE taking the piss.
Of course I didn't. I smiled at her and walked on. But that tiny fleeting thought did occur. I can see why there have been flashpoints.
If we fix our benefits system that problem goes away.
Agreed.
But we won't. The government couldn't even pass the benefit cap changes, fat chance of being able to restructure the whole basis on which benefits are decided.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The majority of voters.
They will pay at the ballot box if the try to obstruct. Remainers would be best advised to accept the result and try to influence implementation rather than impede it.
Thanks to FPTP, they won't. Angry Northern UKIP voters will pile up votes in many seats up north but only win a handful of labour.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
Majorities, especially small ones, crushing minorities is certainly not democracy.
Well it can't be a), since there is no way to remain and leave at the same time, and it can't be c) since that's an even smaller number of people.
"Yep, that is true. Outside of the nationalist right the reaction abroad seems to have been one of complete astonishment. Outside the UK the mainstream opinion is that the vote was a ludicrous act of self-harm. It is now up to the Leavers to show that is wrong, while also delivering on the promises made during the campaign. Very soon we will have a cabinet dominated by Leave Tories, so a start will hopefully be made."
*****
Foreigners simply don't understand the immigration issue.
I did some number crunching on Twitter today, and worked it out, and here's how I put it:
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
Compare with other countries. For France (population density 194) to feel the same "pressure", they’d be taking 1.3 million migrants a year. 1.3 MILLION. Every single YEAR.
For Spain to feel the same pressure they’d be taking 1 million. Every year.
For America, the equivalent is 19 million migrants. Every year. NINETEEN MILLION
In that light, Brexit is no surprise. What is surprising is that England has not elected a Fascist government already
I don't think actual overcrowding has been much of a factor in the referendum, given that, in England at least, the mostly densely populated areas largely voted for Remain, while the Leave vote was strongest in rural areas. This is the opposite to what your thesis would suggest.
Alternatively the parts of the country designed to cope with a dense population don't feel the problem in the same way as the parts of the country not designed to cope with so many people.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
What happens if the "little people" feel emboldened to not vote as they are supposed to again, Mr. Observer? Maybe, just maybe, politics might have been changed by this referendum.
We'll see. The Tory Leavers on here who had been threatening to vote UKIP seem to be safely back in the Tory fold.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
Majorities, especially small ones, crushing minorities is certainly not democracy.
But minorities blocking majorities is even less democratic, surely?
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The majority of voters.
They will pay at the ballot box if the try to obstruct. Remainers would be best advised to accept the result and try to influence implementation rather than impede it.
Thanks to FPTP, they won't. Angry Northern UKIP voters will pile up votes in many seats up north but only win a handful of labour.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
What happens if the "little people" feel emboldened to not vote as they are supposed to again, Mr. Observer? Maybe, just maybe, politics might have been changed by this referendum.
And lots of Little People have discovered they can change Big Stuff. It's been a huge victory for democracy.
If Leadsom gets it we're in trouble, nowhere near enough experience for the most challenging period we have had for a long time. It's ideological again and look where ideology has got us. What happened to proper conservatism, doing what works and what is the stable option? The clue's in the name, people. all i see now are ideologues with their pet ideas that they seek to foist on people. I wish we weren't in such a chaotic position and having to make such a choice but, if it has to be anyone, a pragmatist is needed (and labour should heed that advice as well). I'm glad the Telegraoh deleted that article but what were they thinking?
I think we could do with a fresh start and Leadsom can provide that.
Putting aside my preference for a Leaver like Leadsom, I think we're overdue for a reset. Labour are still fighting over Blairites et al too.
I'm hoping we've reached a watershed in terms of addressing a lot of ignored issues - most of which are deliberate blind-eyeing by the media and Establishment. It'll be a lot healthier to deal with them, than name call those who object.
Too many in our political class are serving themselves, not those who elected them.
Well said. I'm in favour of May for PM on the basis of experience, but a serious reset is well overdue, politicians and parties that don't realise that are going to be toast.
There's too many people that have been ignored, or had their genuine concerns dismissed in prejudicial terms. At least in the UK we can hopefully resolve these issues through the democratic process, rather than more direct means.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
What happens if the "little people" feel emboldened to not vote as they are supposed to again, Mr. Observer? Maybe, just maybe, politics might have been changed by this referendum.
We'll see. The Tory Leavers on here who had been threatening to vote UKIP seem to be safely back in the Tory fold.
The Tory Leavers on here are mainly upper middle class. Lower middle class Tory Leavers may be more tempted by UKIP if free movement is agreed
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
Majorities, especially small ones, crushing minorities is certainly not democracy.
But minorities blocking majorities is even less democratic, surely?
A democratic interpretation of the result would be that yes, Leave won, but narrowly and hence the most just outcome involves leaving the EU but maintaining a close relationship. That is, EEA with full FoM.
And that's fantastic. Except if Brexit ends up harming the "little people". The ruling class, of course, will be entirely unaffected.
What happens if the "little people" feel emboldened to not vote as they are supposed to again, Mr. Observer? Maybe, just maybe, politics might have been changed by this referendum.
We'll see. The Tory Leavers on here who had been threatening to vote UKIP seem to be safely back in the Tory fold.
I think that can be considered a holding position.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
Indeed. It does beg the question of what is 'London'. Is it the geography and buildings. Clearly not - cities are people. But which people? In defining London for voting purposes, we say it is those who live (or register as living) within its geographic boundaries. But in a more real sense, London includes all who work there too.
I wonder how 'London' voted in that sense, the aggregate of all those who live and work in there. I imaging that was a closer run thing.
In that case you include most of the commuter belt and the Home Counties, Essex and Kent, Surrey, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire and even parts of Hampshire as London
"Yep, that is true. Outside of the nationalist right the reaction abroad seems to have been one of complete astonishment. Outside the UK the mainstream opinion is that the vote was a ludicrous act of self-harm. It is now up to the Leavers to show that is wrong, while also delivering on the promises made during the campaign. Very soon we will have a cabinet dominated by Leave Tories, so a start will hopefully be made."
*****
Foreigners simply don't understand the immigration issue.
I did some number crunching on Twitter today, and worked it out, and here's how I put it:
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
Compare with other countries. For France (population density 194) to feel the same "pressure", they’d be taking 1.3 million migrants a year. 1.3 MILLION. Every single YEAR.
For Spain to feel the same pressure they’d be taking 1 million. Every year.
For America, the equivalent is 19 million migrants. Every year. NINETEEN MILLION
In that light, Brexit is no surprise. What is surprising is that England has not elected a Fascist government already
The highest Leave areas were deprived areas which had received huge numbers of Eastern European immigrants during the last decade - Lincolnshire, Thames Estuary, East Anglia and mining areas in Yorkshire and the Midlands.
There had been very little, if any, help or interest from government for these areas to adjust.
Rather it was looked upon as a way of forcing down working class wages. For example note that the infamous Sports Direct warehouse is in Bolsover - 71% Leave.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
No but there is a different feel to outer London, it is the suburbs not the heart of the City
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
420 per square kilometer is 50m x 50m per head, which is a very generous amount of space. If people were feeling pressure from actual population density, they'd be moving out to the countryside in large numbers. In reality people want to live where other people are living, which is why they move together to cities, where the population density is higher.
In any case this has nothing to do with schools and hospitals and barely anything to do with infrastructure. These things are just not particularly constrained by space. They're constrained by the cost of paying people to build them and work on them, which scales great with higher population density.
Britain does have a shortage of space for housing where people actually want to live, but that's entirely driven by regulation. US cities like San Francisco have shown they're perfectly capable of creating the same problem despite their country being nearly empty.
Yep. Let people build upwards, mixed neted/purchase, so we can live affordably. Sorry about the skyline, but affordable life vs. traditional view is not even a close decision.
Build upwards? We tried that post war, didn't work out too well. See social surveys conducted during the war as to what type of housing Londoners wanted. Their views were ignored and we got the tower blocks which were a disaster. Please can we not just repeat the failures of the past.
Ever the Remainer SO it's not about the money. :-)
If you view it only in financial terms you are most likely correct. However the british establishment has just had the biggest kicking I can remember. The certainties of last month are no longer certain and from herfe on they now will have to take on board the electorates view rather than just assume they have nowhere lesel to go.
The Establshment has just nobbled Boris Johnson (deservedly so, of course). It is going absolutely nowhere.
Now that the 2nd referendum petition has run out of steam the anti-democrats are trying to petition for Article 50 to be a parliamentary vote.
We are a parliamentary democracy. The government will decide when to invoke Article 50 and no doubt take note of the advisory referendum which was passed 52:48.
And if they fail to respect the wishes of the people they will soon find themselves unemployed.
That's democracy. I believe that we should have a GE soon. The wishes of which people ? a. All 100% b. The 51.9% c. The 48.1%
The wishes of the majority, given we live in a democracy.
Majorities, especially small ones, crushing minorities is certainly not democracy.
Who is crushing the minority? Is the losing team in a coin flip crushed? Is there persecution of Britons who voted for the minority? Is there a concerted effort to harm only those who voted Remain? Are Remain voters singled out in any way for special treatment?
I had a Brexity moment today. Walking down Parkway, Camden I passed a well-fed, colourful Roma woman, selling the Big Issue. Probably from Bulgaria or Romania. it's well known that they come here to sell the Big Issue, so they can then get tax credits as "self employed". they come here TO be homeless, and claim
For a second the thought zipped across my mind, of walking up to her, and saying "Ok love, you've had your fun, now could you please go home"
Because these people really ARE taking the piss.
Of course I didn't. I smiled at her and walked on. But that tiny fleeting thought did occur. I can see why there have been flashpoints.
It is actually even worse. Big issue works by individuals buying a supply & selling on, with the presumption that homeless people have limited capital & know their own "pitch", so anybody who wants / needs can sell.big issue.
The suggestion is that it is now basically "mob" run & the mob buy up all the copies so basically the roma.have to sell for them but also genuinely homeless people can't even get supply if the magazine.
In many places it is now organised criminal monopoly that controls big issue supply & means for genuine homeless people this avenue of getting oneself back on two feet isn't available.
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
420 per square kilometer is 50m x 50m per head, which is a very generous amount of space. If people were feeling pressure from actual population density, they'd be moving out to the countryside in large numbers. In reality people want to live where other people are living, which is why they move together to cities, where the population density is higher.
In any case this has nothing to do with schools and hospitals and barely anything to do with infrastructure. These things are just not particularly constrained by space. They're constrained by the cost of paying people to build them and work on them, which scales great with higher population density.
Britain does have a shortage of space for housing where people actually want to live, but that's entirely driven by regulation. US cities like San Francisco have shown they're perfectly capable of creating the same problem despite their country being nearly empty.
Yep. Let people build upwards, mixed neted/purchase, so we can live affordably. Sorry about the skyline, but affordable life vs. traditional view is not even a close decision.
Wasn't your Broxtowe constituency home a bungalow ?
"Yep, that is true. Outside of the nationalist right the reaction abroad seems to have been one of complete astonishment. Outside the UK the mainstream opinion is that the vote was a ludicrous act of self-harm. It is now up to the Leavers to show that is wrong, while also delivering on the promises made during the campaign. Very soon we will have a cabinet dominated by Leave Tories, so a start will hopefully be made."
*****
Foreigners simply don't understand the immigration issue.
I did some number crunching on Twitter today, and worked it out, and here's how I put it:
Some Brexit facts: population DENSITY. England is one of the most crowded large countries on earth: 420 people per sq km
Most migrants to the UK come to England (at least 90%). Last year England received about 300,000 migrants...
This accounts for the feeling of “pressure” in England: on schools, hospitals, infrastructure, housing, simple space and land
Compare with other countries. For France (population density 194) to feel the same "pressure", they’d be taking 1.3 million migrants a year. 1.3 MILLION. Every single YEAR.
For Spain to feel the same pressure they’d be taking 1 million. Every year.
For America, the equivalent is 19 million migrants. Every year. NINETEEN MILLION
In that light, Brexit is no surprise. What is surprising is that England has not elected a Fascist government already
I don't think actual overcrowding has been much of a factor in the referendum, given that, in England at least, the mostly densely populated areas largely voted for Remain, while the Leave vote was strongest in rural areas. This is the opposite to what your thesis would suggest.
Alternatively the parts of the country designed to cope with a dense population don't feel the problem in the same way as the parts of the country not designed to cope with so many people.
Quite, Mr. Glenn. Furthermore, to take for example, my part of the country the population is increasing rapidly and dramatically but there is no commensurate investment in infrastructure. No more hospitals, no more ambulances, no more roads or railways, and so forth. On top of which we are seeing cuts on social services like libraries, education budgets, policing and so forth.
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
Indeed. It does beg the question of what is 'London'. Is it the geography and buildings. Clearly not - cities are people. But which people? In defining London for voting purposes, we say it is those who live (or register as living) within its geographic boundaries. But in a more real sense, London includes all who work there too.
I wonder how 'London' voted in that sense, the aggregate of all those who live and work in there. I imaging that was a closer run thing.
In that case you include most of the commuter belt and the Home Counties, Essex and Kent, Surrey, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire and even parts of Hampshire as London
As for who voted to leave: I agree Mr. Charles cannot be counted amongst the "little people", as to the others you mention I have no idea of their background. Nonetheless we have been constantly told that it was the C2DE's that won it for Leave (though to be fair someone did post on here that 43% of the ABC1s voted for leave, something that seems not to be mentioned too much, can't imagine why).
Also 41% of London voted for Leave as well, a fact rather glossed over by people trying to big up the London as Global City schtick.
Most of the London vote for Leave came in Outer London boroughs like Havering, Barking, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon which all voted Leave. Not one inner London borough voted Leave
Next you'll be arguing that they are second class Londoners and their votes shouldn't count.
Indeed. It does beg the question of what is 'London'. Is it the geography and buildings. Clearly not - cities are people. But which people? In defining London for voting purposes, we say it is those who live (or register as living) within its geographic boundaries. But in a more real sense, London includes all who work there too.
I wonder how 'London' voted in that sense, the aggregate of all those who live and work in there. I imaging that was a closer run thing.
In that case you include most of the commuter belt and the Home Counties, Essex and Kent, Surrey, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire and even parts of Hampshire as London
That is, indeed, the point I am making.
Then you are really talking about urban area, not the city itself
"So we will soon be faced with this question: do we as a nation hate foreigners sufficiently to deny ourselves access to the single market? This might easily be rephrased as: is Britain too racist to be a leading nation in a modern globalised world? However one puts it, it’s a question that will soon need to be resolved because, as we stand, the future PM has no mandate on what sort of Brexit to negotiate." Ishiguro in FT.
Call me a bigot, but I struggle to picture a Leaver as anything other than a shaven-headed school skiver with cobweb tattoos on his neck or a shuffling bloke in a crumpled blazer with a toothbrush moustache. I'm sure there must be some Leavers who aren't only to be found on society's desolate fringe, but it's just that I've never met one.
Don't you dare talk about Charles that way!
How do you know I'm not a shaven-headed skool skiver with cobweb tattoos?
At a meeting of Preseli Pembs CLP a motion in support of JC was passed overwhelmingly. Getting very leftish down here. Ps I was unable to attend to a prior engagement in front of the telly. Come on Wales!
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/02/jeremy-corbyn-urged-to-retire-with-dignity-as-hard-left-recruit/
Corbyn moving to the exit without dignity.
The wishes of which people ?
a. All 100%
b. The 51.9%
c. The 48.1%
You've not mentioned @Tykejohnno or @another_richard or me or many others. We're more representative of provincial Britain.
I noticed your impassioned posts FTP about respecting what the demos believed they were voting for/it wasn't a cleverdick FoM fudge.
In any case this has nothing to do with schools and hospitals and barely anything to do with infrastructure. These things are just not particularly constrained by space. They're constrained by the cost of paying people to build them and work on them, which scales great with higher population density.
Britain does have a shortage of space for housing where people actually want to live, but that's entirely driven by regulation. US cities like San Francisco have shown they're perfectly capable of creating the same problem despite their country being nearly empty.
It's just slightly irked me that we have this meme of "ill educated oldies took us out of the EU" that I've seen.
I can't accept the argument that people have become more intelligent in the space of fifty years. A lot of middle-aged people would waltz their way to a 2:1 or better if they were to bother.
On your main points, I completely agree. We've perpetrated another con job on the young. For some degrees the graduate premium has completely disappeared and (iirc) for some types of degree it's actually a graduate deficit.
They will pay at the ballot box if the try to obstruct. Remainers would be best advised to accept the result and try to influence implementation rather than impede it.
A: No.
The government really does need to get Frank Field and IDS alongside others who care about these things to sit down asap and work out how to make our benefits system both fair and based on contributions rather than automatic.
I wonder how 'London' voted in that sense, the aggregate of all those who live and work in there. I imaging that was a closer run thing.
You're a bigot, and you have a piss poor opinion of your own countrymen. Ever considered a career in politics
There's too many people that have been ignored, or had their genuine concerns dismissed in prejudicial terms. At least in the UK we can hopefully resolve these issues through the democratic process, rather than more direct means.
new thread
There had been very little, if any, help or interest from government for these areas to adjust.
Rather it was looked upon as a way of forcing down working class wages. For example note that the infamous Sports Direct warehouse is in Bolsover - 71% Leave.
The suggestion is that it is now basically "mob" run & the mob buy up all the copies so basically the roma.have to sell for them but also genuinely homeless people can't even get supply if the magazine.
In many places it is now organised criminal monopoly that controls big issue supply & means for genuine homeless people this avenue of getting oneself back on two feet isn't available.
Don't need to look far to see why the Eagle aborted on the launchpad last week..
https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2016/jul/02/angela-eagle-anger-rises-in-her-wallasey-constituency-corbyn-labour
Citizen Corby is here for as long as he likes.
(and the long awaited boundary changes are going to be a RedTory massacre).
Ps I was unable to attend to a prior engagement in front of the telly.
Come on Wales!