politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A rather subdued speech by TMay which did not have much sub
Comments
-
That BBC project fear II report forecasting that we will lose Billions from a hard brexit is written by Hector Sants. Anyone remember him? He was our man at the now defunct FSA before and during the banking crisis. He even approved the infamous RBS takeover of ABN AMRO which caused such massive damage to our economy.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
I wouldnt worry too much. To have any chance of getting our way in negotiations with an acceptable soft brexit deal we have to make plain as a pikestaff to the EU that as far as we are concerned, if they dont play ball we are prepared to say 'Face, Bovvered?, Sod You, Doubles and WTO all round' - and importantly do the research and preparation for this.TheScreamingEagles said:Following on from posts earlier on.....
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/783692287507369984
"Mr Sants joined the FSA in a senior position in 2004 and took over as chief executive in July 2007, just weeks before the run on Northern Rock that heralded the banking crisis.
MPs on the Commons Treasury committee accused him of being ‘asleep at the wheel’ as the crisis took hold, although he later insisted the run on the bank could have been prevented if ministers and the Bank of England had followed his advice.
Mr Sants also approved the Royal Bank of Scotland’s disastrous takeover of Dutch bank ABN Amro, which left the Scottish bank needing a £45billion bailout from the taxpayer in 2008."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254453/Former-FSA-head-Hector-Sants-accused-asleep-wheel-run-financial-crash-Sir.html#ixzz4MEcJa96B
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
0 -
I'm truly surprised that so many of the expressed concerns for this country over brexit stem from a desire to live somewhere else.0
-
47% want the UK to leave the single market to get full control over immigration, 39% would accept modified free movement in order to remain in the single market. 60% of Tory voters and 87% of UKIP voters back hard Brexit, compared to just 35% of Labour votersYellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-100 -
Oh come off it, parts of the world, notably the middle east are knee deep in expat service workers from southern europe and asia, the vast majority are treated vastly more shabbily that would ever be contemplated in the UK even under worse plausible government. They come in their droves because there is work there and they want the money.FF43 said:It's personal.
Edit: Seriously dont get me started on UKBA I have years of tales to tell there, but other places are definitely worse.0 -
It's interesting how the national debate is no longer conservatism versus socialism in the same way as the last election, or 2010 before that.
It's liberalism versus nationalism. Labour policy, if there is one, is not too far off Charlie Kennedy's left wing Lib Dems; the Tories have gone full UKIP. The third and fourth parties (shut up SNP) have had their clothes stolen.0 -
If you work in the UAE though you pay virtually no taxIndigo said:
Oh come off it, parts of the world, notably the middle east are knee deep in expat service workers from southern europe and asia, the vast majority are treated vastly more shabbily that would ever be contemplated in the UK even under worse plausible government. They come in their droves because there is work there and they want the money.FF43 said:It's personal.
Edit: Seriously dont get me started on UKBA I have years of tales to tell there, but other places are definitely worse.0 -
Eeyore has a poor opinion of most of the other animals in the Forest, describing them as having "No brain at all, some of them", "only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake" (from chapter 1 of The House at Pooh Corner)MarkSenior said:
You have jumped off the cliff , half way to the rocks below and shout out " Look No broken bones - you were wrong " .ThreeQuidder said:
What recession? You do realise that just about everyone is forecasting growth in 2016Q3?brokenwheel said:
This recession we're in is a more pressing matter though.TheScreamingEagles said:Following on from posts earlier on.....
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/783692287507369984
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eeyore0 -
The same is true about expats in asia, where the requirements are substantially same now as they were then. Its not the ease of the process that has changed so much as more people live and work abroad. The UK now has the largest diaspora of any first world country.Ishmael_X said:
I don't doubt you, but people didn't do it so much. In 1981 there were 198,000 foreigners (all nationalities) living in Spain as against 5 million in 2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_SpainHurstLlama said:
There was nothing difficult about travelling to or living in Spain under Franco or Portugal under the Salazar regime. It was a bit more expensive to get there, perhaps and if they didn't want you they could throw you out but the administration was not much different that it is today. You arrived, filled out a form, paid a small sum of money (plus, in Portugal, an equal sum in the form of a bribe to the official) and you got your residence permit. Easy peasy. Crikey, in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.Ishmael_X said:
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
0 -
That monmouth ohio poll is a disaster for trump.
He's gone all in on a rustbelt strategy and it 's failing.0 -
This doesnt alter my point, most expat service workers are abroad for the money (either directly, or because they dont pay much tax) and most are used to, or at least expecting fairly shabby treatment, its the "its personal" view which is cobblers.HYUFD said:
If you work in the UAE though you pay virtually no taxIndigo said:
Oh come off it, parts of the world, notably the middle east are knee deep in expat service workers from southern europe and asia, the vast majority are treated vastly more shabbily that would ever be contemplated in the UK even under worse plausible government. They come in their droves because there is work there and they want the money.FF43 said:It's personal.
Edit: Seriously dont get me started on UKBA I have years of tales to tell there, but other places are definitely worse.0 -
@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.0
-
in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.HurstLlama said:
There was nothing difficult about travelling to or living in Spain under Franco or Portugal under the Salazar regime. It was a bit more expensive to get there, perhaps and if they didn't want you they could throw you out but the administration was not much different that it is today. You arrived, filled out a form, paid a small sum of money (plus, in Portugal, an equal sum in the form of a bribe to the official) and you got your residence permit. Easy peasy. Crikey, in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.Ishmael_X said:
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
well they decided Poland in the forties was too cold.0 -
I am pretty sure we didn't! It was nowhere near the numbers that we have now.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
0 -
As was mentioned earlier its hogwash, the vast majority of the voters experience of living abroad is a couple of weeks somewhere in the sun once a year, many never go abroad in their whole life. The number of people that want to live abroad for protracted periods is a small percentage of the population, just very well represented on this forum.frpenkridge said:I'm truly surprised that so many of the expressed concerns for this country over brexit stem from a desire to live somewhere else.
0 -
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
Very few in Leicester. Good to see more cyclists in London, but nothing like the the numbers in Denmark or the Netherlands.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
Have you been to London lately. It is infested with segregated cycle only lanes.foxinsoxuk said:
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.Jobabob said:
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would beAlastairMeeks said:
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.Jobabob said:
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.williamglenn said:
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'taffys said:May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
a) fewer accidents
b) less pollution
c) thinner, better looking people
d) less sickness
e) less pressure on companies through absence
f) less congestion
g) better mental health
h) more sex
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.0 -
Nowhere in the 1970s had anywhere near the number we have now, even places that still need visas!SouthamObserver said:
I am pretty sure we didn't! It was nowhere near the numbers that we have now.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
0 -
I noticed that our superiors are happy to concede Spain to the great unwashed but they wouldn't be quite so keen if they got as far as Tuscany or Hungary.0
-
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
And it cut out competition for the sun loungers, M.r Brooke.Alanbrooke said:
in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.HurstLlama said:
There was nothing difficult about travelling to or living in Spain under Franco or Portugal under the Salazar regime. It was a bit more expensive to get there, perhaps and if they didn't want you they could throw you out but the administration was not much different that it is today. You arrived, filled out a form, paid a small sum of money (plus, in Portugal, an equal sum in the form of a bribe to the official) and you got your residence permit. Easy peasy. Crikey, in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.Ishmael_X said:
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
well they decided Poland in the forties was too cold.0 -
Last time the OH-PA gap was this wide was in 2000--which has some interesting similarities to 2016 in terms of political geography
17 retweets 54 likes
Except ofcourse Virginia and Colorado seem out of reach for Trump this time.
0 -
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.ThreeQuidder said:
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.williamglenn said:
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
0 -
Because they cannot afford to go there anymoreTCPoliticalBetting said:
Why would they be at risk?frpenkridge said:When the working classes realise that their retirement homes in Spain are at risk, I expect a vicious backlash against brexit.
0 -
This is the same MarkSenior who lost a gold sovereign betting that the UK wouldn't go into recession in 2008. He isn't exactly a leading light on economic matters.MarkSenior said:
You have jumped off the cliff , half way to the rocks below and shout out " Look No broken bones - you were wrong " .ThreeQuidder said:
What recession? You do realise that just about everyone is forecasting growth in 2016Q3?brokenwheel said:
This recession we're in is a more pressing matter though.TheScreamingEagles said:Following on from posts earlier on.....
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/783692287507369984
To be fair to him, though, he did hand over the equivalent value of the sovereign to a dog charity of my choosing. Unlike tim, who welched on his sovereign bet with me....0 -
In public: pious handwringing. In private: Moet & Chandon all round. Quaffed from old-fashioned Champagne saucers, with a selection of delicious and expensive canapes.TheScreamingEagles said:Something we've discussed on PB
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/7837127429560115210 -
Indeed South Devon and the Isle of Wight did not have so many in the seventies as now.Indigo said:
Nowhere in the 1970s had anywhere near the number we have now, even places that still need visas!SouthamObserver said:
I am pretty sure we didn't! It was nowhere near the numbers that we have now.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
Retiring to the Costas is quite a common aspiration for Working Class Leicester folk. It is often cheaper than Skegness, and a lot nicer.0 -
Mr Senior are you related to the economic forecaster Mark Senior who in 2007/8 said there was no way we were heading into a recession? A forecast that rivals the one denying that Obama could be the next POTUS from our in house advertising director.MarkSenior said:
You have jumped off the cliff , half way to the rocks below and shout out " Look No broken bones - you were wrong " .ThreeQuidder said:
What recession? You do realise that just about everyone is forecasting growth in 2016Q3?brokenwheel said:
This recession we're in is a more pressing matter though.TheScreamingEagles said:Following on from posts earlier on.....
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/783692287507369984
0 -
Indeed Mr Betting, this is the latest in a long line of strawmen. The only person who promised 100k is Cameron, and he was an idiot. The public would be quite happy this year to see a number smaller than last year. If the general trend was to admit (for residency) people with jobs, who had a chance of integrating well, and didn't have criminal records or proclivities toward blowing things up, the public would no doubt be quite tolerant of considerably larger numbers than 100k.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.0 -
Well that's a much more nuanced and achievable goal than the current policy.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
Quite. If I'd thought we'd have a vote in say ten years I'd have swallowed my doubts probably and voted remain with a held nose, but I knew this was the sole chance in my lifetime. Having been denied any vote for decades and specifically reneged on in the case of the Constitution/Lisbon I was painted into a corner. Cameron's crap attempt at renegotiation and his treating us like fools that it was great was the final straw.Black_Rook said:
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.ThreeQuidder said:
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.williamglenn said:
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
I was lost to Remain because those in power have been pig headed about my assumed consent to giving more power to the Project.0 -
Why is Theresa May wearing an imperial purple toga with a dagger brooch?0
-
Does anybody think that Corbyn's Labour are bothered with forensic examination of tax legislation, to root out those sneaky loophole before the even sneakier accountants get to apply them? In this regard, Corbyn is truly the Heir to Blair....Black_Rook said:
In public: pious handwringing. In private: Moet & Chandon all round. Quaffed from old-fashioned Champagne saucers, with a selection of delicious and expensive canapes.TheScreamingEagles said:Something we've discussed on PB
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/7837127429560115210 -
As a matter of interest, what odds will people give me on net migration going negative (i.e. more people leaving the country than arriving) in one year between now and 2025?
I'm happy to pay now, so whoever's on the other side of the trade gets the time value of money benefit
0 -
Indeed.Black_Rook said:
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.ThreeQuidder said:
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.williamglenn said:
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
Given the difficulties we had had in even getting a referendum in the first place, it was clear this was the last chance to Leave.0 -
It's not a straw man at all. It's the policy of the current government ( albeit with no target date ) which the new PM has committed herself to.Indigo said:
Indeed Mr Betting, this is the latest in a long line of strawmen. The only person who promised 100k is Cameron, and he was an idiot. The public would be quite happy this year to see a number smaller than last year. If the general trend was to admit (for residency) people with jobs, who had a chance of integrating well, and didn't have criminal records or proclivities toward blowing things up, the public would no doubt be quite tolerant of considerably larger numbers than 100k.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
Betfair midprices:
Clinton 1.365
Sanders 205
Biden 225
Kaine 695
Trump 4.05
Pence 385
Ryan 510
Implied probability of neither Clinton nor Trump: 2.0%.0 -
I have a Nigerian prince who will take that betrcs1000 said:As a matter of interest, what odds will people give me on net migration going negative (i.e. more people leaving the country than arriving) in one year between now and 2025?
I'm happy to pay now, so whoever's on the other side of the trade gets the time value of money benefit0 -
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.0 -
Cameron chose <100,000 because that number was considered to be a sustainable number to avoid swamping our public services in the long term. Cameron was no idiot but he didn't always ensure that an aspiration was not confused with a promise - which it was not.Indigo said:
Indeed Mr Betting, this is the latest in a long line of strawmen. The only person who promised 100k is Cameron, and he was an idiot. The public would be quite happy this year to see a number smaller than last year. If the general trend was to admit (for residency) people with jobs, who had a chance of integrating well, and didn't have criminal records or proclivities toward blowing things up, the public would no doubt be quite tolerant of considerably larger numbers than 100k.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
Cameron and the 100k is a story of unbelieveable stupidity. He made a promise. The voters believed him. His mate and govt strategic planner, Osborne, just ignored the promise. Osborne blocked May when she tried to implement changes and Osborne soft balled the EU negotiations over stricter immigration controls. It all led eventually to a voter backlash which tipped LEAVE's votes ahead of REMAIN. Cameron and Osborne lost their jobs. Partly because Osborne did not do what Cameron wanted to do. Osbore remained Cameron's chum. Yet Cameron blames Gove, Boris and now May for his demise when the truth is it was Osborne's fault. If only Cameron had moved Osborne after the 2012 omnishambles budget and Cameron had kept Osborne away from his meddling.Indigo said:
Indeed Mr Betting, this is the latest in a long line of strawmen. The only person who promised 100k is Cameron, and he was an idiot. The public would be quite happy this year to see a number smaller than last year. If the general trend was to admit (for residency) people with jobs, who had a chance of integrating well, and didn't have criminal records or proclivities toward blowing things up, the public would no doubt be quite tolerant of considerably larger numbers than 100k.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
0 -
The current policy is there because Cameron stupidly promised it (twice) and its too political at the moment to be seen easing away from, once the fuss has died down I am sure a more realistic number will be found.YellowSubmarine said:
Well that's a much more nuanced and achievable goal than the current policy.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
In my experience most of the public, even the BrExit inclined, are pretty tolerate of a fair number of immigrants, providing that they dont take the piss, which in this context means spending their life on benefits, or committing crimes, or threatening the defense of the realm, and making more than a token effort to fit in and rub along. What really pisses people off is people who don't want to make an effort, spend their whole time criticising the lifestyles of people whose families have been here for generations, and make them feel like they are not living in their own country.0 -
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine0 -
"Retiring to the Costas is quite a common aspiration for Working Class Leicester folk." I wonder why that would be. The remainers have got quite a circular jape working for them there which they depict as a virtuous circle.0
-
She was not in the slightest bit desperate to go to the UK. She thought it would be nice to visit and spend some money. FWIW and also anecdotally, I have found Chinese immigration to be efficient and courteous, which I think a reasonable expectation for the fee you are paying.Indigo said:
Oh come off it, parts of the world, notably the middle east are knee deep in expat service workers from southern europe and asia, the vast majority are treated vastly more shabbily that would ever be contemplated in the UK even under worse plausible government. They come in their droves because there is work there and they want the money.FF43 said:It's personal.
Edit: Seriously dont get me started on UKBA I have years of tales to tell there, but other places are definitely worse.
It's not just bureaucratic incompetence.The point is, if you have a deliberate policy to make people feel unwelcome, they will take it personally and there will a reputational damage to your country
0 -
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine0 -
Et tu, Boris?Dromedary said:Why is Theresa May wearing an imperial purple toga with a dagger brooch?
0 -
Oh I see. Folk aren't bothered yet the pledge can't be abandoned by the new government because it would be too unpopular with the voters who aren't bothered. Unlike say the tangential matter of the Deficit target that was chucked in the bin immeadiately. OK.Indigo said:
The current policy is there because Cameron stupidly promised it (twice) and its too political at the moment to be seen easing away from, once the fuss has died down I am sure a more realistic number will be found.YellowSubmarine said:
Well that's a much more nuanced and achievable goal than the current policy.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
In my experience most of the public, even the BrExit inclined, are pretty tolerate of a fair number of immigrants, providing that they dont take the piss, which in this context means spending their life on benefits, or committing crimes, or threatening the defense of the realm, and making more than a token effort to fit in and rub along. What really pisses people off is people who don't want to make an effort, spend their whole time criticising the lifestyles of people whose families have been here for generations, and make them feel like they are not living in their own country.0 -
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?0
-
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.0 -
In practice it will probably just accelerate the regional disparities between 'Leaverstan' and the affluent metropolis where both immigrants and natives will feel that they are living under siege.FF43 said:It's not just bureaucratic incompetence.The point is, if you have a deliberate policy to make people feel unwelcome, they will take it personally and there will a reputational damage to your country
0 -
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/files/ge_4pg-newspaper.pdfperdix said:
Cameron choseIndigo said:
Indeed Mr Betting, this is the latest in a long line of strawmen. The only person who promised 100k is Cameron, and he was an idiot. The public would be quite happy this year to see a number smaller than last year. If the general trend was to admit (for residency) people with jobs, who had a chance of integrating well, and didn't have criminal records or proclivities toward blowing things up, the public would no doubt be quite tolerant of considerably larger numbers than 100k.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
Read the headline on the front page, then the section on immigration on the second page, then section 5 on the third page
0 -
No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)0 -
I don't know. However Rudd described her Company reporting of nationality of employees policy as a " Nudge " one.AndyJS said:Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
0 -
Uni fees, you were quite happy to dirch them at the time.YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. Folk aren't bothered yet the pledge can't be abandoned by the new government because it would be too unpopular with the voters who aren't bothered. Unlike say the tangential matter of the Deficit target that was chucked in the bin immeadiately. OK.Indigo said:
The current policy is there because Cameron stupidly promised it (twice) and its too political at the moment to be seen easing away from, once the fuss has died down I am sure a more realistic number will be found.YellowSubmarine said:
Well that's a much more nuanced and achievable goal than the current policy.TCPoliticalBetting said:
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.YellowSubmarine said:............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
In my experience most of the public, even the BrExit inclined, are pretty tolerate of a fair number of immigrants, providing that they dont take the piss, which in this context means spending their life on benefits, or committing crimes, or threatening the defense of the realm, and making more than a token effort to fit in and rub along. What really pisses people off is people who don't want to make an effort, spend their whole time criticising the lifestyles of people whose families have been here for generations, and make them feel like they are not living in their own country.0 -
From Rudd it was more of a "grab em by the nadgers" policy.YellowSubmarine said:
I don't know. However Rudd described her Company reporting of nationality of employees policy as a " Nudge " one.AndyJS said:Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
0 -
chucklebrokenwheel said:
Et tu, Boris?Dromedary said:Why is Theresa May wearing an imperial purple toga with a dagger brooch?
0 -
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.Alanbrooke said:
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be uneconomic at salaries Brits want or to collapse social care for Brexit voting pensioners ) when we've a huge deficit still will be Nil. That leaves us with cutting numbers by being obstructive and unwelcoming in the application process, screwing ex Polytechnics and using lower trend growth to lower demand. That's before push back from Commonwealth citizens/communities who were told Leave meant easier immigration for their uncle. And of course the reciprocal loss of rights for Brits in the EU will lead to modest decreases in emigration and modest increases in Brits returning. Both of which *worsen* the net migration figure. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.0 -
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.AndyJS said:Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."0 -
Ha !TCPoliticalBetting said:
From Rudd it was more of a "grab em by the nadgers" policy.YellowSubmarine said:
I don't know. However Rudd described her Company reporting of nationality of employees policy as a " Nudge " one.AndyJS said:Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
0 -
I believe it was spun off & privatized a few years ago.AndyJS said:Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
0 -
My sources tell me that the number of applications for visas through embassies that was rejected last year was up around 20% on the year before, not because of any change in the rules, or the quality of candidates, but because there was (i assume political) pressure being applied to apply the rules as stringently as possible. He presumed this was because the government was under pressure to get the headline figure down and was finding it impossible to manage EU immigration or illegal immigration, so what did that leave.FF43 said:It's not just bureaucratic incompetence.The point is, if you have a deliberate policy to make people feel unwelcome, they will take it personally and there will a reputational damage to your country
0 -
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.Alanbrooke said:
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did0 -
"No opposition hurts the government". Well if that's so, please can the government set up a slush fund to build up a parliamentary Labour Party that's against nuclear weapons and British membership of NATO and to start with has about 300 MPs. That would be far more "oppositional" than what there is on the "opposition" benches at the moment.0
-
Oi - please separate out Durham Union Society tossers from the greater pool of stout yeomen and hearty good fellows who were up in the basted North....Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.Alanbrooke said:
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did0 -
Mr Putin runs his own opposition parties. Just saying.Dromedary said:"No opposition hurts the government". Well if that's so, please can the government set up a slush fund to build up a parliamentary Labour Party that's against nuclear weapons and British membership of NATO and to start with has about 300 MPs. That would be far more "oppositional" than what there is on the "opposition" benches at the moment.
0 -
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
0 -
Sorry Ive been too indoctrinated by that famous alumnus Mr MeeksMarqueeMark said:
Oi - please separate out Durham Union Society tossers from the greater pool of stout yeomen and hearty good fellows who were up in the basted North....Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.Alanbrooke said:
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/05/british-people-are-nasty-and-arrogant-says-wwii-flying-ace-chuck/
"Chuck" Yeager, well known not just for his aviation brilliance, but also for his hugely abrasive and arrogant manner, says that the British are nasty and arrogant. No irony there then.0 -
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really0 -
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.0 -
Mostly I think it is because it is sunny with cheap booze and a good place for the grandkids to visit. What else do you think might be a factor?frpenkridge said:"Retiring to the Costas is quite a common aspiration for Working Class Leicester folk." I wonder why that would be. The remainers have got quite a circular jape working for them there which they depict as a virtuous circle.
0 -
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really0 -
Why Did Indiana State Police Raid A Voter Registration Group's Office?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/in-indiana-police-raid-a-democratic-voter-registration-office
My guess is trump will win 90%+ of the police vote in the red states.
Not that we'll ever know of course.0 -
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old0 -
Fair point. Three years in a place where the biggest society is the Christian Union. And then the Durham Union Society. Can leave the weaker-willed effected for life...Alanbrooke said:Sorry Ive been too indoctrinated by that famous alumnus Mr Meeks
0 -
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old0 -
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).0 -
So do Dominos PizzasIanB2 said:
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?0 -
Faster. Perhaps.Alanbrooke said:
So do Dominos PizzasIanB2 said:
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?0 -
LOLIanB2 said:
Faster. Perhaps.Alanbrooke said:
So do Dominos PizzasIanB2 said:
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?0 -
It really is time to drop the whole net migration figure and look instead at just the immigration figure. People leaving doesn't cause worries about changing cultures or carry any implied terrorism risks.foxinsoxuk said:
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
Or even ditch the figures completely, but make sure that the people that stay are useful productive members of society that are not a burden to the public purse, and that are likely to integrate well, and make sure the public have visibility of crooks and troublemakers being kicked out the country.0 -
Is the booze that cheap these days, Doc? It used to be, as did the fags, but I am not sure it is anymore. That Euro thingy seemed to level up prices, cheapest bars I have found in recent years are in Leeds.foxinsoxuk said:
Mostly I think it is because it is sunny with cheap booze and a good place for the grandkids to visit. What else do you think might be a factor?frpenkridge said:"Retiring to the Costas is quite a common aspiration for Working Class Leicester folk." I wonder why that would be. The remainers have got quite a circular jape working for them there which they depict as a virtuous circle.
0 -
Dominos Pizzas have a greater chance of seeing the inside of 10 Downing Street.Alanbrooke said:
So do Dominos PizzasIanB2 said:
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?
When the all night Brexit negotiations are in full swing....0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/05/the-conservative-conference-was-thick-with-the-smell-of-power-la/
We’ve reached the political equivalent of the chemical state of equilibrium, where reactants in a solution have changed as much as they ever will and have settled into a stable state.
For Labour that means earnest discussions about community activism punctuated by the occasional rally, while giving businesses and wealth creators the cold shoulder. For the Conservatives it means government, influence, the fawning attention of industry. And power.
Just like Labour used to have.
Ouch!0 -
Is it just me or is there something a bit, well, Trekkie, about our Prime Minister's outfit today?0
-
Sure, with the Brexit devaluation it is not so cheap as it once was, but still cheaper than here. With food also cheaper, no heating bills and cheap Ryanair flights retiring abroad is as affordable as retiring in the UK, at least while we are in the EU. It is not just a Middle Class aspiration.HurstLlama said:
Is the booze that cheap these days, Doc? It used to be, as did the fags, but I am not sure it is anymore. That Euro thingy seemed to level up prices, cheapest bars I have found in recent years are in Leeds.foxinsoxuk said:
Mostly I think it is because it is sunny with cheap booze and a good place for the grandkids to visit. What else do you think might be a factor?frpenkridge said:"Retiring to the Costas is quite a common aspiration for Working Class Leicester folk." I wonder why that would be. The remainers have got quite a circular jape working for them there which they depict as a virtuous circle.
Indeed the people that I know who never go abroad are the poorly paid (my NHS clinic coordinator) and the very wealthy (I have some wealthy friends who only ever holiday in Cornwall, Scilly or the Wight).0 -
Is that instead of Byron Burger?MarqueeMark said:
Dominos Pizzas have a greater chance of seeing the inside of 10 Downing Street.Alanbrooke said:
So do Dominos PizzasIanB2 said:
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.Alanbrooke said:
HmmIanB2 said:
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the populationDromedary said:
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
sad really
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?
When the all night Brexit negotiations are in full swing....0 -
It's remarkable the discretion levels in the system - in some parts of the world, the immigration rules are strictly applied. In others, not so much.Indigo said:
My sources tell me that the number of applications for visas through embassies that was rejected last year was up around 20% on the year before, not because of any change in the rules, or the quality of candidates, but because there was (i assume political) pressure being applied to apply the rules as stringently as possible. He presumed this was because the government was under pressure to get the headline figure down and was finding it impossible to manage EU immigration or illegal immigration, so what did that leave.FF43 said:It's not just bureaucratic incompetence.The point is, if you have a deliberate policy to make people feel unwelcome, they will take it personally and there will a reputational damage to your country
My favourite story about the immigration comedy is still the one about the Home Office having problems with the Zimbabwean local staff at the consulate/embassy not being racist.0 -
Ahh! The mobile goalposts. I wondered when they might appear.Indigo said:
It really is time to drop the whole net migration figure and look instead at just the immigration figure. People leaving doesn't cause worries about changing cultures or carry any implied terrorism risks.foxinsoxuk said:
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
Or even ditch the figures completely, but make sure that the people that stay are useful productive members of society that are not a burden to the public purse, and that are likely to integrate well, and make sure the public have visibility of crooks and troublemakers being kicked out the country.
But what about all the pressure on housing and schools? Or are you now a Corbynite?0 -
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..foxinsoxuk said:
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).0 -
Could you repeat the terms of the bet?rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Would you do odds on net immigration being less than 100 000 at any point in this Parliament, calculated on present terms.
Howabout 200 000?0 -
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.HurstLlama said:
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..foxinsoxuk said:
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.-1 -
You are right - apart from the very rich. Nowadays the typical Spanish expat is way more numerous and a lot less well off, although many are 'comfortable. Those who are keenest to return to blighty - are the elderly and infirm who lack language skills and the younger couples worried about educating their children abroad and many who don't like the much lower wage levels.SouthamObserver said:
I am pretty sure we didn't! It was nowhere near the numbers that we have now.Indigo said:
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...SouthamObserver said:
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?YellowSubmarine said:YouGov finds a big swing toward Hard Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/yougov-hard-brexit-has-widespread-support-2016-10
0 -
My goalposts are not moving at all. I have always said I am a Hannanite, my point and his about immigration has never been about numbers, its been that is should be under the control of the sovereign British people, which includes the ability to bar entry to undesirables and kick out criminals and troublemakers.foxinsoxuk said:
Ahh! The mobile goalposts. I wondered when they might appear.Indigo said:
It really is time to drop the whole net migration figure and look instead at just the immigration figure. People leaving doesn't cause worries about changing cultures or carry any implied terrorism risks.foxinsoxuk said:
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.HurstLlama said:
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
Or even ditch the figures completely, but make sure that the people that stay are useful productive members of society that are not a burden to the public purse, and that are likely to integrate well, and make sure the public have visibility of crooks and troublemakers being kicked out the country.
But what about all the pressure on housing and schools? Or are you now a Corbynite?
I am for the equal opportunities for all immigrants so long as they apply lawfully, are productive members of society, and try hard to fit in. How could I be anything else, I have spend quite a lot of my time in the last decade helping various Asians apply for visa's to the UK.0 -
0
-
Indeed. Three years in the finest city in England.MarqueeMark said:
Oi - please separate out Durham Union Society tossers from the greater pool of stout yeomen and hearty good fellows who were up in the basted North....Alanbrooke said:
Oh gawd - DurhamYellowSubmarine said:
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.Alanbrooke said:
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?YellowSubmarine said:
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.Alanbrooke said:
were you arguing anything in the post ?YellowSubmarine said:
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.Alanbrooke said:
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.YellowSubmarine said:
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.Alanbrooke said:
Pure nonsenseYellowSubmarine said:@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
well that explains it.
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
Castle
1974 - 770 -
The one thing we know about government is that, no sooner does an indicator become the focus of some attention, they will be all over it fiddling about with how it's calculated, such that comparisons with past statistics becomes more and more difficult. A bet like yours really needs an independent arbiter whose decision is final!foxinsoxuk said:
Could you repeat the terms of the bet?rcs1000 said:No one wants to take my money?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Would you do odds on net immigration being less than 100 000 at any point in this Parliament, calculated on present terms.
Howabout 200 000?0
