politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Joff Wild says Owen Smith will lose, Labour will fight brut
Comments
-
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.0 -
Indeed - many thanksRobD said:@Paul_Bedfordshire.. ah, you got it!
0 -
The Standard also reports Lloyds of London is ready to move business to continental Europe without more clarity on BREXIT0
-
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
@Plato_Says
My last comment directed to you was rude. I apologise.
I broke my rule; I will go back to ignoring your posts.0 -
Loving the Comres poll - 62% optimistic about post-Brexit Britain.
0 -
I had an interesting chat with a middle aged east african muslim resident over here today on Law and order. Would have made Littlejohn blush....nunu said:One graph that shows why the race in Ohio is so close. Yikes!
https://infogr.am/ohio_income_vs_us_income
Ohio is more than 80% white.
Mind you he wasnt too keen on Trump - or hillary.
Think there might be a lot of hand sitting come election day.0 -
It's a colourful metaphor and, I would suggest, unlikely, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly unhinged position. Remainers trying to win the peace as best they can because they lost the war is a valid strategy in these circumstances.MaxPB said:
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
My favourite was the New Yorker cartoon.foxinsoxuk said:
Glad to hear Thomas is still going. A gentle tickle on the whiskers or ears would not be much of a shock, even for a veteran moggie.HurstLlama said:Re Thomas:
My thanks to those who offered advice. I found a mirror to hold by his nose, as per Dr Sox, and whilst I was trying to work out where in the bundle of curled fur his nose actually was and how I could get a mirror close to it I saw an ear flicker. So the old boy is still alive and just not ready for his tea yet (age and too many prawns at lunchtime I suppose).
Phew, thanks to all.
@Pulpstar Simba's 6.8kg seems an awful lot. The chap across the road has a Siamese that got into that range (mainly I think because at least two of the neighbours were also feeding his cat) and it has cost him an arm and a leg on Vet's bills.
My grandfathers last words were "I am a little sleepy after that lunch, I will go have a nap in my chair".
At the age of 94 a pretty good way to go, though a shock to my grandmother when she brought him a cup of tea an hour later.
My favourite joke on this subject is a Bob Monkhouse one:
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my father did. Not screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus!"
Two old codgers sitting next to each other in their club. One is peacefully asleep, the other is reading the obituary column.
Second turns to the first: "Good Lord, Fentiman! I had no idea you'd died!"
0 -
ClassicIshmael_X said:
"The future of car production at Nissan's factory in Sunderland could be at risk, the automaker's president and chief executive Carlos Ghosn has warned.John_M said:
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.Sean_F said:
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.HYUFD said:
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform todayHurstLlama said:
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.foxinsoxuk said:
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
In an interview with BBC News Online, Mr Ghosn made it clear that the plant's future would depend on whether the UK adopted the euro.
"We are worried about having our cost base in pounds and to have our revenue base in euros," he said.
"This is a situation we don't like.
"We had this situation when we decided to make the investments on the Micra.""
bbc news 7 Oct 20020 -
Assuming all those in Remain want a softish Brexit, which while you can can on most, probably, won't be all, because people are strange. Still, it's at heart an achievable goal.HYUFD said:
Exactly 48% voted Remain only 3% is needed from Leave to ensure softish BrexitYellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
Silly season.HYUFD said:The Standard also reports Lloyds of London is ready to move business to continental Europe without more clarity on BREXIT
0 -
Resistance movement. Whatever this is, it is not a hostile occupation of the nation. The language is applicable to someone who's screws have become slightly loose.kle4 said:
It's a colourful metaphor and, I would suggest, unlikely, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly unhinged position. Remainers trying to win the peace as best they can because they lost the war is a valid strategy in these circumstances.MaxPB said:
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
Whilst you're about - do you know anything about the development of squirrel virus vaccines? A friend is distantly involved re Scottish red one protection.Charles said:
My favourite was the New Yorker cartoon.foxinsoxuk said:
Glad to hear Thomas is still going. A gentle tickle on the whiskers or ears would not be much of a shock, even for a veteran moggie.HurstLlama said:Re Thomas:
My thanks to those who offered advice. I found a mirror to hold by his nose, as per Dr Sox, and whilst I was trying to work out where in the bundle of curled fur his nose actually was and how I could get a mirror close to it I saw an ear flicker. So the old boy is still alive and just not ready for his tea yet (age and too many prawns at lunchtime I suppose).
Phew, thanks to all.
@Pulpstar Simba's 6.8kg seems an awful lot. The chap across the road has a Siamese that got into that range (mainly I think because at least two of the neighbours were also feeding his cat) and it has cost him an arm and a leg on Vet's bills.
My grandfathers last words were "I am a little sleepy after that lunch, I will go have a nap in my chair".
At the age of 94 a pretty good way to go, though a shock to my grandmother when she brought him a cup of tea an hour later.
My favourite joke on this subject is a Bob Monkhouse one:
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my father did. Not screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus!"
Two old codgers sitting next to each other in their club. One is peacefully asleep, the other is reading the obituary column.
Second turns to the first: "Good Lord, Fentiman! I had no idea you'd died!"0 -
And it must be a good thing that we are forced to confront our mistakes?Gardenwalker said:
Again, my point is that the EU does not deliver low growth; individual countries may not have been growing much but that is different.Sean_F said:
Then we have to change the model, since it delivers low growth and a gigantic trade deficit with the EU (whereas we have a healthy surplus with the rest of the world).Gardenwalker said:
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.Sean_F said:
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?HYUFD said:
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!Sean_F said:WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Membership of the EU has assisted in delivering massive FDI for the UK since the 90s; but we failed to get our own house in order, watched London race away while everywhere else lagged, and we are trying to blame the EU.
There is no other *trade* model which helps balance between London and the rest. We have to do it ourselves.0 -
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.0 -
That's why I said it was a colourful metaphor. I presume you object when people talk about 'destroying' their opponents for similar reasons? That you remember to upbraid people criticising the patriotism and very loyalty of those on other sides of the EU debate and other political debates? We know there are some on here who bizarrely act as though such language is literal, but while it is not the sort of language I would employ, is it appreciably worse than some others? If anything, going all in on the metaphor at least lends it a certain charm.MaxPB said:
Resistance movement. Whatever this is, it is not a hostile occupation of the nation. The language is applicable to someone who's screws have become slightly loose.kle4 said:
It's a colourful metaphor and, I would suggest, unlikely, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly unhinged position. Remainers trying to win the peace as best they can because they lost the war is a valid strategy in these circumstances.MaxPB said:
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
Yup. On the side I don't see the fascination with trade deals. Nice to have, certainly, but we have no free trade arrangements with the USA, Korea, China, the Anzacs and most other countries yet we seem to buy and sell with them quite happily. Why we should, apparently, need some other arrangement for the EU countries I am not sure.foxinsoxuk said:
Though WTO rules are not as simple as they sound!HurstLlama said:
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.foxinsoxuk said:
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
Signing up totrade agreements while over a barrel with the clock ticking is doomed to failure. Either agree to something sub-optimal or get hard Brexit without preparation.
Better to plan for hard Brexit, breaking off all institutional ties, then start negotiations.
Supply chains was the reason given when I last asked this question. Really, my computer was built in England from components almost all manufactured in the Far East and not a FTA in sight. Japanese made cars are subject to an import tariff, courtesy of the EU, want to count the number of the Honda Jazz model you see on the road? I was in the local Honda dealership last week and a new top of the range Jazz was on sale for £18,000. How much are the European cars on equivalent quality?
Companies from all over the world sell to each other all the time. FTAs might ease that process but re not essential for it.0 -
It also shows the way of thinking, someone who views Brexit in terms of a hostile occupation and the role of europhiles as the glorious resistance has got issues.kle4 said:
That's why I said it was a colourful metaphor. I presume you object when people talk about 'destroying' their opponents for similar reasons? We know there are some on here who bizarrely act as though such language is literal, but while it is not the sort of language I would employ, is it appreciably worse than some others? If anything, going all in on the metaphor at least lends it a certain charm.MaxPB said:
Resistance movement. Whatever this is, it is not a hostile occupation of the nation. The language is applicable to someone who's screws have become slightly loose.kle4 said:
It's a colourful metaphor and, I would suggest, unlikely, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly unhinged position. Remainers trying to win the peace as best they can because they lost the war is a valid strategy in these circumstances.MaxPB said:
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.0 -
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
No, wait. They are the glorious EU resistance against the Brexit occupation of the nation. A very, err, telling view of the situation, how these Europhiles view themselves.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.0 -
Apart from the slight catch of half of remauners now wishing they had voted leave now they have seen that the armageddon warnings were bollocks.HYUFD said:
Exactly 48% voted Remain only 3% is needed from Leave to ensure softish BrexitYellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
I think you're overreacting - hyperbolistic language of that kind is the norm more than the exception. Being histrionic in tone on an issue does not mean someone has issues. More to the point, since it is so very very common even here, which is comparatively sober and restrained compared to many places, singling out an individual example seems like odd place to draw the line.MaxPB said:
It also shows the way of thinking, someone who views Brexit in terms of a hostile occupation and the role of europhiles as the glorious resistance has got issues.kle4 said:
That's why I said it was a colourful metaphor. I presume you object when people talk about 'destroying' their opponents for similar reasons? We know there are some on here who bizarrely act as though such language is literal, but while it is not the sort of language I would employ, is it appreciably worse than some others? If anything, going all in on the metaphor at least lends it a certain charm.MaxPB said:
Resistance movement. Whatever this is, it is not a hostile occupation of the nation. The language is applicable to someone who's screws have become slightly loose.kle4 said:
It's a colourful metaphor and, I would suggest, unlikely, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly unhinged position. Remainers trying to win the peace as best they can because they lost the war is a valid strategy in these circumstances.MaxPB said:
You've become unhinged, YS.YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal experience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.0 -
Ask us in a year. At least. It'll take a lot more than that to be definitive, but we'll have a better picture than right now, though there have been some decent signs thankfully.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
Apart from the slight catch of half of remauners now wishing they had voted leave now they have seen that the armageddon warnings were bollocks.HYUFD said:
Exactly 48% voted Remain only 3% is needed from Leave to ensure softish BrexitYellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.0 -
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think the EU's political culture did not help and had, in some cases, a baleful influence on British politics. The top down somewhat elitist approach, the contempt for democracy, the endless reiteration of there being no alternative, of the destination being irreversible, the refusal to deal with people's concerns, the elevation of principles and currencies into sacred cows all led to the referendum result. EU politicians have their share of the blame, even if British politicians also do. Fundamentally, I think British democracy has particular roots which being in the EU were not nurtured and were in some cases harmed. Where the EU was good at helping to reinforce democracy in former Warsaw Pact countries, it harmed or was indifferent to British political culture and British democracy, from which it could have learnt much.
0 -
I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.0 -
Yes, you don't see overly emotional exaggerations on our side at all.MaxPB said:
No, wait. They are the glorious EU resistance against the Brexit occupation of the nation. A very, err, telling view of the situation, how these Europhiles view themselves.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
0 -
Good luck with the sale, Thrak.Thrak said:On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal exoerience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.
Hopefully the good news from the PMIs will restore a bit of confidence to the market.
However, it seems reasonable to believe that prices will move sidewise for a while in London and SE. One of the healthier outcomes of Brexit.
Don't think we'll see negative equity unless, madly, we rush for a hard Brexit.0 -
And some Tory MP's agree with me. A brilliant summary of what should be the Official Opposition's policy in yesterdays Mail on Sunday. Sadly we don't have a functioning opposition. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3772775/Ex-Business-Minister-ANNA-SOUBRY-says-tariff-free-trade-Europe-control-immigration-false-promise.html0
-
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think the EU's political culture did not help and had, in some cases, a baleful influence on British politics. The top down somewhat elitist approach, the contempt for democracy, the endless reiteration of there being no alternative, of the destination being irreversible, the refusal to deal with people's concerns, the elevation of principles and currencies into sacred cows all led to the referendum result. EU politicians have their share of the blame, even if British politicians also do. Fundamentally, I think British democracy has particular roots which being in the EU were not nurtured and were in some cases harmed. Where the EU was good at helping to reinforce democracy in former Warsaw Pact countries, it harmed or was indifferent to British political culture and British democracy, from which it could have learnt much.0 -
I see the smiling Jemimas have folded.
I wonder when it will dawn on them that they've lost?0 -
The housing market has been slowing since Osborne's budget.
0 -
Well of course Soubry agrees - as Europhile as Europhiles get, apparently. It'll need some more middle of the road types to gain traction.YellowSubmarine said:And some Tory MP's agree with me. A brilliant summary of what should be the Official Opposition's policy in yesterdays Mail on Sunday. Sadly we don't have a functioning opposition. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3772775/Ex-Business-Minister-ANNA-SOUBRY-says-tariff-free-trade-Europe-control-immigration-false-promise.html
0 -
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
Why would anyone seek to compare over half fellow citizens as Nazis?YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
I know Paddy called us all brownshirts earlier today - but I fail to see what's admirable there either.0 -
The difference is that no one wanted to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The public have voted in favour of Brexit. Complicated though it may be, it represents the will of the people. A more apt comparison may be WW2, another complex and bloody affair which the public were resolved to win at any cost.YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
This is what I think you underestimate, there is a will to make Brexit happen, at whatever the cost. People voted for a lesser economy, they are prepared for it.0 -
Lol - it kind of would actually - you clearly don't know the region. However, I agree and both hope and think that Nissan will stay. I rather like buying my new Juke every 2 years and having it delivered from my home town of birth to my home in southern SpainCasino_Royale said:
Whatever. This is the Japanese and South Korean governments sabre rattling on behalf of their businesses and interests, in no small part because they've smelt that the UK Government isn't quite sure what to do yet, and they hope to influence the outcome.HYUFD said:
Oh they will if the Japanese and South Koreans warnings are ignored, potentially hundreds of thousands of skilled working class and lower middle-class workers and voters will lose their jobsSean_F said:
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.HYUFD said:
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for CorbynTOPPING said:
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.HYUFD said:
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!Sean_F said:WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Conversely, it's the job of the UK to act on behalf of our people's interests, particularly given the mandate they've just been given.
We would all do the same, on either side.
Whatever the settlement is the North East isn't going to become a barren wasteland off the back of it.0 -
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/546256/UK_Tables_Aug_2016__cir_.pdf
Brexit affects house sales is basically bollocks. It's Osborne's BTL tax wheezes that have distorted the 2016 market.0 -
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th0 -
Soubry? Seriously? She makes Ken Clarke look wishy washy.YellowSubmarine said:And some Tory MP's agree with me. A brilliant summary of what should be the Official Opposition's policy in yesterdays Mail on Sunday. Sadly we don't have a functioning opposition. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3772775/Ex-Business-Minister-ANNA-SOUBRY-says-tariff-free-trade-Europe-control-immigration-false-promise.html
0 -
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
It will happen, a tariff free trade deal for goods is pretty much assured. As many have pointed out it will be services NTBs that might be an issue, see comments from Lloyd's of London today, pushing the government towards taking up Solvency II as an equivalence.felix said:
Lol - it kind of would actually - you clearly don't know the region. However, I agree and both hope and think that Nissan will stay. I rather like buying my new Juke every 2 years and having it delivered from my home town of birth to my home in southern SpainCasino_Royale said:
Whatever. This is the Japanese and South Korean governments sabre rattling on behalf of their businesses and interests, in no small part because they've smelt that the UK Government isn't quite sure what to do yet, and they hope to influence the outcome.HYUFD said:
Oh they will if the Japanese and South Koreans warnings are ignored, potentially hundreds of thousands of skilled working class and lower middle-class workers and voters will lose their jobsSean_F said:
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.HYUFD said:
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for CorbynTOPPING said:
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.HYUFD said:
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!Sean_F said:WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Conversely, it's the job of the UK to act on behalf of our people's interests, particularly given the mandate they've just been given.
We would all do the same, on either side.
Whatever the settlement is the North East isn't going to become a barren wasteland off the back of it.0 -
I thought Truss said the ECHR was destined for the dustbin?TOPPING said:
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
I'm starting to prepare for the worst, being honest with my employers that I can't sustain living in two places much longer, looking for temporary positions that still make financial sense back at where I need to sell.Gardenwalker said:
Good luck with the sale, Thrak.Thrak said:On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal exoerience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.
Hopefully the good news from the PMIs will restore a bit of confidence to the market.
However, it seems reasonable to believe that prices will move sidewise for a while in London and SE. One of the healthier outcomes of Brexit.
Don't think we'll see negative equity unless, madly, we rush for a hard Brexit.
If people were just wanting a bit more off that's doable, the market still ticks over, but people not buying and postponing indefinitely? That's a big problem.0 -
The ECHR is not the EU or anything to do with the EU. Why must you conflate the two?TOPPING said:
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
To satirise having spent my entire life being called a quisling and appeaser.PlatoSaid said:
Why would anyone seek to compare over half fellow citizens as Nazis?YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
I know Paddy called us all brownshirts earlier today - but I fail to see what's admirable there either.0 -
Agree strongly.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think the EU's political culture did not help and had, in some cases, a baleful influence on British politics. The top down somewhat elitist approach, the contempt for democracy, the endless reiteration of there being no alternative, of the destination being irreversible, the refusal to deal with people's concerns, the elevation of principles and currencies into sacred cows all led to the referendum result. EU politicians have their share of the blame, even if British politicians also do. Fundamentally, I think British democracy has particular roots which being in the EU were not nurtured and were in some cases harmed. Where the EU was good at helping to reinforce democracy in former Warsaw Pact countries, it harmed or was indifferent to British political culture and British democracy, from which it could have learnt much.
The Commission construct is totally at odds, and is subtly undermining, our our political and democratic heritage.
It's one reason, I admit, I thought of voting to Leave.
Ultimately, though, I judged the economic dislocation and geopolitical loss of influence to be too great a risk.
Regarding the Commission though, we do have plenty of allies, including Germany, who prefer working nation to nation.
What we failed to do, again, is advocate any clear reform programme. We just bitched - as Paul in Bedfordshire does - about jumped up Belgians.0 -
Are you in the states?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
I had an interesting chat with a middle aged east african muslim resident over here today on Law and order. Would have made Littlejohn blush....nunu said:One graph that shows why the race in Ohio is so close. Yikes!
https://infogr.am/ohio_income_vs_us_income
Ohio is more than 80% white.
Mind you he wasnt too keen on Trump - or hillary.
Think there might be a lot of hand sitting come election day.
I'm not convinced turnout will be low, I think the fear of the other will drive turnout higher. Is there any evidence that a nasty campaign drives it lower ? The London Mayo campaign was pretty nasty and turnout rose.0 -
A future government. Leaving the EU cuts the head off the snake. The rest will follow in time over the years and decades aheadTOPPING said:
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!0 -
White sticky liquid everywhere.nunu said:
Are you in the states?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
I had an interesting chat with a middle aged east african muslim resident over here today on Law and order. Would have made Littlejohn blush....nunu said:One graph that shows why the race in Ohio is so close. Yikes!
https://infogr.am/ohio_income_vs_us_income
Ohio is more than 80% white.
Mind you he wasnt too keen on Trump - or hillary.
Think there might be a lot of hand sitting come election day.
I'm not convinced turnout will be low, I think the fear of the other will drive turnout higher. Is there any evidence that a nasty campaign drives it lower ? The London Mayo campaign was pretty nasty and turnout rose.0 -
Independence always generates administrative problems, but one can generally work through them.YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.0 -
That's demonstrably untrue. Afghanistan was very popular at the start and had tripartite support. The polling on Iraq was more mixed but we saw the classic surge in support for it once combat began through to the " Mission Accomplished " stage.MaxPB said:
The difference is that no one wanted to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The public have voted in favour of Brexit. Complicated though it may be, it represents the will of the people. A more apt comparison may be WW2, another complex and bloody affair which the public were resolved to win at any cost.YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
This is what I think you underestimate, there is a will to make Brexit happen, at whatever the cost. People voted for a lesser economy, they are prepared for it.0 -
Nope.RobD said:
I thought Truss said the ECHR was destined for the dustbin?TOPPING said:
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?0 -
-
Wow, a Guardian piece with a sensible point
Elected politicians, people responsible for making laws, must live by different standards to those who vote for them. As plenty of MPs have discovered in the past, they have to pay a price for the privileges they enjoy.
Part of that price is the need to sacrifice an absolute right to privacy.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/sep/05/why-the-sunday-mirror-was-justified-in-exposing-keith-vaz?CMP=share_btn_tw0 -
Goodchestnut said:The housing market has been slowing since Osborne's budget.
0 -
Mr Thrak, three properties in my road have come up for sale since last April. Two of them (three bedroomed bungalows) sold within a few days for pretty much the asking price (one in July and one in August). The house next door to me (3 bedroomed detached) hasn't shifted and gets very little interest as far as we can determine despite the price having dropped by 50k.Thrak said:On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal experience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.
The reasons why a house doesn't sell may have nothing to do with the referendum.0 -
Wow the distortions created by Osborne's tax meddling is very clear. We are now running at 10% (10,000) below the monthly average of transactions.chestnut said:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/546256/UK_Tables_Aug_2016__cir_.pdf
Brexit affects house sales is basically bollocks. It's Osborne's BTL tax wheezes that have distorted the 2016 market.
0 -
My own experience (solicitor in North London) is the property Market is doing fine.Thrak said:
I'm starting to prepare for the worst, being honest with my employers that I can't sustain living in two places much longer, looking for temporary positions that still make financial sense back at where I need to sell.Gardenwalker said:
Good luck with the sale, Thrak.Thrak said:On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal exoerience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.
Hopefully the good news from the PMIs will restore a bit of confidence to the market.
However, it seems reasonable to believe that prices will move sidewise for a while in London and SE. One of the healthier outcomes of Brexit.
Don't think we'll see negative equity unless, madly, we rush for a hard Brexit.
If people were just wanting a bit more off that's doable, the market still ticks over, but people not buying and postponing indefinitely? That's a big problem.0 -
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.
Well quite. The EU is, in the final analysis, a purpose-built mechanism for erasing the nation states of Europe from the map. A co-worker of mine who voted Leave said, not long after the referendum, that if we had opted to stay in then we'd have had the Euro in ten years and the UK Parliament would've been dissolved in twenty. I think that it's probable he was wrong - given that the EU is dysfunctional, destructive, and that most of us are likely to live to see it fall - but why take the risk of being wiped out by the EU, even if it was only a slight one?
Fortunately, whatever the economic risks of quitting the EU, the majority of the population thought that the stakes for our democracy, our self-government and our cohesion as a nation were too high to gamble everything, in exchange for the continuation of preferential trading arrangements with the continent. Money isn't everything.0 -
Because it is a European institution which governs our courts' judgements. Surely the very definition of sovereignty-abusing. The very stuff that Brexiters got so het up about.MaxPB said:
The ECHR is not the EU or anything to do with the EU. Why must you conflate the two?TOPPING said:
If Theresa May and her three muppets won't bin the EAW and ECHR, who exactly are you expecting to?Casino_Royale said:
An exit from the Treaty of Rome wasn't built in a day.TOPPING said:
The spasms of cold hard fact from the government are entertaining me.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, I'm not Bargaining: I'm delighted.YellowSubmarine said:
Kubler-Ross is an amusing and literate put down but it's not an accurate assessment of the situation. The UK's membership of the EU is dead. But neither the UK nor the EU is dead. So not only is the ' Bargaining ' stage unavoidable it's entirely necessary and will go on for years. If you don't like bargaining stages don't vote for the world's biggest and most complex divorce.Casino_Royale said:
Open Britain is the half-hearted attempt of Europhiles to move from the Denial/Anger to Bargaining stage, whilst still having one very big foot grounded in Denial/Anger.MP_SE said:
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...YellowSubmarine said:The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
It's the spasms of emotion from the Remain camp as they come to terms with their grief that entertain me.
EAW? In
ECHR? In
Points-based immigration system? Out
Freedom!
Oh, and it is something that in April Theresa May said we must leave, while in June she said we would stay.0 -
North Essex market seems ok tooSean_F said:
My own experience (solicitor in North London) is the property Market is doing fine.Thrak said:
I'm starting to prepare for the worst, being honest with my employers that I can't sustain living in two places much longer, looking for temporary positions that still make financial sense back at where I need to sell.Gardenwalker said:
Good luck with the sale, Thrak.Thrak said:On the earlier housing market comments, and from personal exoerience, this in the south east.
The market has dried up drastically, my property type was selling in a couple of weeks as of June at the price it is on for, as seen through offers/ sales on Rightmove. Since then there have been just two properties sold in my price range in my area (300 to 400k within five miles or so). That's a drastic turnaround.
Knowing the difficulties that Brexit was going to cause I went with Foxtons who, as Topping suggests, do get results. I did this, telling them that I would accept 10k off straight away but that their pushiness and results oriented bonuses would be useful to get viewings where other estate agents are drying up. The result? Even with Foxtons they are struggling to find people buying at this level. The ultra high level? No problem there.
So, a month later, one offer from an investor trying it on by asking for 30k below the asking price when no property like mine is even 15k below. A number of people worried that they would be left with negative equity 'when house prices go down'. A number who won't commit because 'nobody knows what's happening'. Virtuallly nothing being bought at this, the more affordable (for this part of the south east) price level. Nothing else, one offer in a month when pre Brexit properties like this were gone in a week or two. Yes, things have changed.
I've got maybe a few months before this starts to become a serious problem, dropping prices won't help because it's not cost that is the issue, I have to move or give up the new job I've just moved to. Maybe rent out but that looks equally unpromising.
On the quiz, I seem to be the only person to come up as David Cameron, I'm very happy with that where others here clearly wouldn't be.
Hopefully the good news from the PMIs will restore a bit of confidence to the market.
However, it seems reasonable to believe that prices will move sidewise for a while in London and SE. One of the healthier outcomes of Brexit.
Don't think we'll see negative equity unless, madly, we rush for a hard Brexit.
If people were just wanting a bit more off that's doable, the market still ticks over, but people not buying and postponing indefinitely? That's a big problem.0 -
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?0 -
You can always find an excuse for doing something. You can always justify making things the same, more tidy, more consistent. Learning when to leave well alone, learning that there is more than one way to skin a cat, learning that variety is better than conformity is hard, learning not to interfere is hard. Especially for bureaucrats and politicians who wanted to remake a whole new Europe as if they had a blank sheet of paper.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.0 -
Dr Sox and Mr Llama. That has always been my negotiating position:HurstLlama said:
Yup. On the side I don't see the fascination with trade deals. Nice to have, certainly, but we have no free trade arrangements with the USA, Korea, China, the Anzacs and most other countries yet we seem to buy and sell with them quite happily. Why we should, apparently, need some other arrangement for the EU countries I am not sure.foxinsoxuk said:
Though WTO rules are not as simple as they sound!HurstLlama said:
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.foxinsoxuk said:
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
Signing up totrade agreements while over a barrel with the clock ticking is doomed to failure. Either agree to something sub-optimal or get hard Brexit without preparation.
Better to plan for hard Brexit, breaking off all institutional ties, then start negotiations.
Supply chains was the reason given when I last asked this question. Really, my computer was built in England from components almost all manufactured in the Far East and not a FTA in sight. Japanese made cars are subject to an import tariff, courtesy of the EU, want to count the number of the Honda Jazz model you see on the road? I was in the local Honda dealership last week and a new top of the range Jazz was on sale for £18,000. How much are the European cars on equivalent quality?
Companies from all over the world sell to each other all the time. FTAs might ease that process but re not essential for it.
1. Say what we want.
2. If we don't get it, or sufficiently close to it that the deal is clearly to our benefit, i.e. if it is clear the EU want to punish us to set an example, immediately fall back to full, hard Brexit and WTO rules, and tell the EU to let us know when they are ready to negotiate with us as a friend, not an example.0 -
Brexit is not the issue. Osborne tinkering with tax and BTL has dramatically distorted sales flows. I linked the official numbers a short while back.Thrak said:There is one massive dividing line and it's the Brexit vote. We have uncertainty, we have a lack of direction, of course that spooked buyers. The stamp duty changes had a very targeted effect.
The most recent numbers are very average. March was astonishingly high, April astonishingly low.
0 -
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.0 -
Hmm. So we've posters on a political betting website who think a 3.8% victory in one election on a hugely complex problem ends all discussion ? Good luck with that. Back later !0
-
Not that popular, and Iraq had very little support as the Labour party learned and Lib Dems benefitted from. Indeed, the issue was that the government lacked the resolve to win because it would have taken 250,000 occupation armies for 30 years to "win". For no gain.YellowSubmarine said:
That's demonstrably untrue. Afghanistan was very popular at the start and had tripartite support. The polling on Iraq was more mixed but we saw the classic surge in support for it once combat began through to the " Mission Accomplished " stage.MaxPB said:
The difference is that no one wanted to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The public have voted in favour of Brexit. Complicated though it may be, it represents the will of the people. A more apt comparison may be WW2, another complex and bloody affair which the public were resolved to win at any cost.YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
This is what I think you underestimate, there is a will to make Brexit happen, at whatever the cost. People voted for a lesser economy, they are prepared for it.
What you and your ilk don't understand is that the public have voted for this and the gain is not about the economy, it is about identity and the nature of our country, it runs much deeper than money. That's what you europhiles don't understand, it is also why you must endure the accusations of being quisling traitors. I hold no allegiance to the EU or any European nation. My allegiance is to this nation and no other. Overseas countries have their interests at heart and Brussels has its own agenda. When those interests or agendas align with our own we should work together, when they don't we shouldn't. Our national interest is far more important to me than some sense of collective European spirit.
Until you understand that my feelings about this country are in the majority among leave and remain voters and your feelings of collectove spirit are in the minority any efforts to have a "glorious resistance" will fail.0 -
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.0 -
But more to the point, you appear to be regarding being in the EU as the end in itself, rather than - as most people, I think, did, up until the point that they didn't - a means to an end of greater prosperity. And - with your talk of 'making the occupation difficult' - you now appear to be arguing for sabotaging British prosperity as a means of returning to the EU. I may be misrepresenting you, and apologise if I am. But this seems an odd way of looking at things.YellowSubmarine said:
To satirise having spent my entire life being called a quisling and appeaser.PlatoSaid said:
Why would anyone seek to compare over half fellow citizens as Nazis?YellowSubmarine said:I'm not unhinged. I'm using a military metaphor which may or may not be valid. Operation Sealion ( which autocorrect changed to session ) was meant to provoke and satirise Brexiters love of Nazi analogies. But if you prefer the western occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both were brutally swift and neither came close to being militarily defeated. Yet we gave up on both and sued for peace. Why ? Because It all turned out to be a vastly more complex, lengthy and costly exercise than we were told at the start with vastly fewer benefits. In fact the £350m per week for the NHS is a bit like the WMD come to think of it.
I'm just attempting to discuss the politics of it moving forward. I think a resistance strategy is the face of a militarily superior force is the least worst way forward.
I know Paddy called us all brownshirts earlier today - but I fail to see what's admirable there either.0 -
I think that's fair. I certainly don't think all the actions of some hardcore remainers is fair or sensible even from their own perspectives, but people are free to campaign and fight, democratically, previous democratic decisions. Or else we'd never permit opposition after a GE for a start.YellowSubmarine said:Hmm. So we've posters on a political betting website who think a 3.8% victory in one election on a hugely complex problem ends all discussion ? Good luck with that. Back later !
Good night all.0 -
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.
Some Brexiters, @MaxPB I think for example, think that the one is ok and the other an abomination. I can't quite see the logic in that but there you go.
OK supper time.0 -
0
-
Do you think Brexit is going to reverse the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs?Cyclefree said:
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th
Most of the rest of the world is phasing them out or already has done so. Its not some sort of EU plot and it would have happened whether we were in the EU or not.
0 -
Surely we can just replicate exactly the same rights, but have our own Supreme Court sit in judgment?TOPPING said:
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.0 -
It's a court we founded, the issue is the charter of fundamental rights which we were supposed to have opted out of, but didn't. That coupled with the ill written HRA has turned the ECHR into a criminal's charter. Leaving the EU means no more ECJ/charter and rewriting the HRA will shift the balance back to human rights.TOPPING said:Because it is a European institution which governs our courts' judgements. Surely the very definition of sovereignty-abusing. The very stuff that Brexiters got so het up about.
Oh, and it is something that in April Theresa May said we must leave, while in June she said we would stay.0 -
All I care about is that we're getting champagne by the pint againJonathanD said:
Do you think Brexit is going to reverse the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs?Cyclefree said:
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th
Most of the rest of the world is phasing them out or already has done so. Its not some sort of EU plot and it would have happened whether we were in the EU or not.
0 -
We may not have had a clear reform programme. But I don't think any of the other countries really wanted anything like the sort of reform needed to have made Britain happy with the EU as it is and, critically, as it is likely to develop.Gardenwalker said:
Agree strongly.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think the EU's political culture did not help and had, in some cases, a baleful influence on British politics. The top down somewhat elitist approach, the contempt for democracy, the endless reiteration of there being no alternative, of the destination being irreversible, the refusal to deal with people's concerns, the elevation of principles and currencies into sacred cows all led to the referendum result. EU politicians have their share of the blame, even if British politicians also do. Fundamentally, I think British democracy has particular roots which being in the EU were not nurtured and were in some cases harmed. Where the EU was good at helping to reinforce democracy in former Warsaw Pact countries, it harmed or was indifferent to British political culture and British democracy, from which it could have learnt much.
The Commission construct is totally at odds, and is subtly undermining, our our political and democratic heritage.
It's one reason, I admit, I thought of voting to Leave.
Ultimately, though, I judged the economic dislocation and geopolitical loss of influence to be too great a risk.
Regarding the Commission though, we do have plenty of allies, including Germany, who prefer working nation to nation.
What we failed to do, again, is advocate any clear reform programme. We just bitched - as Paul in Bedfordshire does - about jumped up Belgians.
And I have to say that while Germany may have talked a good game there is very little evidence of her having sided with or helped Britain over the years in a way which might have avoided the current position.
Britain's influence (and it probably will be less or different to what it has been) will IMO be more prejudiced by the undermining of our political and democratic heritage than by not being members of the EU. That democratic heritage long predated the EU and can grow and develop.
0 -
It was an illustrative example only. The meddling attitude of the EU in all things was the salient point. It has done at least as much damage as the grand cockups.JonathanD said:
Do you think Brexit is going to reverse the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs?Cyclefree said:
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th
Most of the rest of the world is phasing them out or already has done so. Its not some sort of EU plot and it would have happened whether we were in the EU or not.0 -
Crazy - we could sell each other whatever customers want.JonathanD said:
Do you think Brexit is going to reverse the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs?Cyclefree said:
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.Cyclefree said:
Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -TOPPING said:
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.Cyclefree said:
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.
I think th
Most of the rest of the world is phasing them out or already has done so. Its not some sort of EU plot and it would have happened whether we were in the EU or not.0 -
A lot of our law uses ye olde French, that's why we need foreign courts to influence us, we wouldn't get the word estoppel without foreign helpRobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
Haven't you see The Sun and The Daily Mail complain about the out of touch judiciary? That's also why.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_French0 -
gah! (at me answering and not eating, not you!)RobD said:
Surely we can just replicate exactly the same rights, but have our own Supreme Court sit in judgment?TOPPING said:
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.
We can, if we withdraw from the ECHR. Then we can construct any HRA we want, and have our courts opine on it and its violations.
But we have decided not to withdraw from the ECHR so our courts will continue to be bound by the EC(ourt of)HR.
In other words, in the cold light of day we realised that the ECHR is a Good Thing and if you are going to have the ECHR then you need the ECHR. If you see what I mean.0 -
We aren't, at least post-brexit. If we rewrite the HRA the government can basically choose to ignore the ECHR if there is a valid reason to do so. While in the EU we must do exactly as the ECJ say when they rule on the charter.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.0 -
Or May decided not to spend her political capital on it because of all the inevitable shrieking about Tories taking away human rights.TOPPING said:
gah! (at me answering and not eating, not you!)RobD said:
Surely we can just replicate exactly the same rights, but have our own Supreme Court sit in judgment?TOPPING said:
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.
We can, if we withdraw from the ECHR. Then we can construct any HRA we want, and have our courts opine on it and its violations.
But we have decided not to withdraw from the ECHR so our courts will continue to be bound by the EC(ourt of)HR.
In other words, in the cold light of day we realised that the ECHR is a Good Thing and if you are going to have the ECHR then you need the ECHR. If you see what I mean.0 -
It might well do but we are staying in the European Convention of Human Rights and therefore the European Court of Human Rights will outrank our own courts. And you are happy with that. I thought the whole point of Brexit was sovereignty. And that Brexiters didn't like that sort of national-overruling type of European institution.MaxPB said:
It's a court we founded, the issue is the charter of fundamental rights which we were supposed to have opted out of, but didn't. That coupled with the ill written HRA has turned the ECHR into a criminal's charter. Leaving the EU means no more ECJ/charter and rewriting the HRA will shift the balance back to human rights.TOPPING said:Because it is a European institution which governs our courts' judgements. Surely the very definition of sovereignty-abusing. The very stuff that Brexiters got so het up about.
Oh, and it is something that in April Theresa May said we must leave, while in June she said we would stay.0 -
I can just imagine Juncker's reaction....MaxPB said:
We aren't, at least post-brexit. If we rewrite the HRA the government can basically choose to ignore the ECHR if there is a valid reason to do so. While in the EU we must do exactly as the ECJ say when they rule on the charter.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
0 -
BTL is not an issue in my locality, also, for others, I have had quite a few conversations with estate agents who, despite the public face, admit that there is an issue at this price level and in a range of locations. At a higher price level, not so much.chestnut said:
Brexit is not the issue. Osborne tinkering with tax and BTL has dramatically distorted sales flows. I linked the official numbers a short while back.Thrak said:There is one massive dividing line and it's the Brexit vote. We have uncertainty, we have a lack of direction, of course that spooked buyers. The stamp duty changes had a very targeted effect.
The most recent numbers are very average. March was astonishingly high, April astonishingly low.0 -
I'm just glad it's not used by the French...TheScreamingEagles said:
A lot of our law uses ye olde French, that's why we need foreign courts to influence us, we wouldn't get the word estoppel without foreign helpRobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
Haven't you see The Sun and The Daily Mail complain about the out of touch judiciary? That's also why.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_French
0 -
Fine. I get that. But surely it is the sort of thing that gets the @MaxPBs and @Casino_Royales of this world apoplectic. And this is after we've voted to leave the EU!RobD said:
Or May decided not to spend her political capital on it because of all the inevitable shrieking about Tories taking away human rights.TOPPING said:
gah! (at me answering and not eating, not you!)RobD said:
Surely we can just replicate exactly the same rights, but have our own Supreme Court sit in judgment?TOPPING said:
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.
We can, if we withdraw from the ECHR. Then we can construct any HRA we want, and have our courts opine on it and its violations.
But we have decided not to withdraw from the ECHR so our courts will continue to be bound by the EC(ourt of)HR.
In other words, in the cold light of day we realised that the ECHR is a Good Thing and if you are going to have the ECHR then you need the ECHR. If you see what I mean.0 -
It doesn't though, the ECHR doesn't outrank our court. Only the ECJ does.TOPPING said:
It might well do but we are staying in the European Convention of Human Rights and therefore the European Court of Human Rights will outrank our own courts. And you are happy with that. I thought the whole point of Brexit was sovereignty. And that Brexiters didn't like that sort of national-overruling type of European institution.MaxPB said:
It's a court we founded, the issue is the charter of fundamental rights which we were supposed to have opted out of, but didn't. That coupled with the ill written HRA has turned the ECHR into a criminal's charter. Leaving the EU means no more ECJ/charter and rewriting the HRA will shift the balance back to human rights.TOPPING said:Because it is a European institution which governs our courts' judgements. Surely the very definition of sovereignty-abusing. The very stuff that Brexiters got so het up about.
Oh, and it is something that in April Theresa May said we must leave, while in June she said we would stay.0 -
A small minority, drowned out by said shrieks.TOPPING said:
Fine. I get that. But surely it is the sort of thing that gets the @MaxPBs and @Casino_Royales of this world apoplectic. And this is after we've voted to leave the EU!RobD said:
Or May decided not to spend her political capital on it because of all the inevitable shrieking about Tories taking away human rights.TOPPING said:
gah! (at me answering and not eating, not you!)RobD said:
Surely we can just replicate exactly the same rights, but have our own Supreme Court sit in judgment?TOPPING said:
It's like the single market and the ECJ. If we are signed up to the idea of either a single market on the one hand, or a convention on human rights on the other, we need a supranational institution that enforces the laws of each.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
The EC(ourt)HR does for the E(convention)HR what the ECJ does for the single market.
We can, if we withdraw from the ECHR. Then we can construct any HRA we want, and have our courts opine on it and its violations.
But we have decided not to withdraw from the ECHR so our courts will continue to be bound by the EC(ourt of)HR.
In other words, in the cold light of day we realised that the ECHR is a Good Thing and if you are going to have the ECHR then you need the ECHR. If you see what I mean.0 -
What the fuck are you talking about? Of course we can't ignore the ECHR. Nor would we. We can withdraw from the convention, but we didn't do that.MaxPB said:
We aren't, at least post-brexit. If we rewrite the HRA the government can basically choose to ignore the ECHR if there is a valid reason to do so. While in the EU we must do exactly as the ECJ say when they rule on the charter.RobD said:
Ta! I still fail to see we need to be under the jurisdiction of a foreign court in these matters.TOPPING said:
rightsinfo.org/breaking-theresa-may-will-not-try-leave-european-convention-human-rights/RobD said:
Yes, I probably am! Don't have a source for May saying we are not leaving the ECHR? Would be interesting to read it.TOPPING said:
Nope.
She said that the UK would introduce a bill of rights. The UK under the sainted Theresa will not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights so will therefore be bound, whatever our bill of rights contains, by the European Court of Human Rights.
You are perhaps confusing this with the Human Rights Act?
and on that note, bon nuit, tout le monde.
0 -
Ha, good luck Italians with that. Do you want your Ferraris to be more expensive in London than our McLarens and Aston Martins, really? And good luck convincing the Germans that a trade war with the UK will end well, when we have something like an £80bn annual trade deficit with the EU.RobD said:One for our @HYUFD from the Telegraph:
Mr Davis’ comments came after an Italian minister threatened to start a trade war with the UK if the British Government attempts to curb free movement rules.-1 -
It's going to add quite a burden to our political process having to suddenly get involved in all this minutiae that we had been previously able to subcontract to the EU. MPs are going to get quite bored. One of the advantages of the EU was the amount of WTO etc regulations that the EU Parliament dealt with that Parliament was able to pass through on the nod as secondary legislation. This was the source of a large chunk of the misleading statistics about a large percentage of our laws "originating in the EU". I guess it might all have to be done as primary legislation in future.JonathanD said:
Do you think Brexit is going to reverse the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs?Cyclefree said:
That's how you get from not wanting to have murderous wars to the EU telling people what kinds of light bulbs they can and can't buy.kle4 said:
It really is strange just how much the EU has wanted to interfere in the small things. In some ways, it has provoked more ire than interfering in big things. Pooling sovereignty for grand ideals, grand projects, can seem worth it. The dream of the EU was not unattractive. But it was so obsessed with minutiae, with grubby detail and suffocating control of the mundane. Why? Was it because it did not have control of the truly powerful areas, defence, foreign affairs, etc? So the bureaucracy sought to exert influence everywhere else that it could, without asking how it truly added to the dream of a grand, united Europe?Paul_Bedfordshire said:
Most of the rest of the world is phasing them out or already has done so. Its not some sort of EU plot and it would have happened whether we were in the EU or not.
0
