politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » James Chapman’s Democrats notion is a doomed distraction
Comments
-
The Great Eastern?ydoethur said:
It's a bit harsh to blame WSL for the Brittanic being hit by a torpedo. It's also worth remembering Olympic was torpedoed too and survived, although it was probably helped somewhat by the torpedo in question failing to explode!CarlottaVance said:
It was a claim also made - by journalists - of other large liners at the time. Ironically two of the Olympic class sank.....ydoethur said:
In fairness to White Star Line, they never claimed Titanic was unsinkable. They said it was 'practically unsinkable' which was indeed correct.Scott_P said:
The Titanic sailed for hundreds of miles without hitting an iceberg, and is therefore unsinkable...CarlottaVance said:But that catastrophe was predicted for a year ago......and so far, the only catastrophic damage has been to the reputations of those who predicted it.......
On topic, why do Remoaners think predicting catastrophe is going to work this time - when it failed to last time and the predicted catastrophe failed to materialise. Voters were aware there was an economic downside risk when they voted to leave.......
There was of course one ship even before the Titanic that survived a series of disastrous accidents including the breaking of its rudder during a major storm and the tearing of a gash 85 feet long and about 8-9 feet wide in its side, partly because it was double hulled. If not unsinkable, it certainly proved to be damned hard to sink, and indeed when it was broken up it took something like two years to scrap. It is quite stunning to reflect this was not even compulsory on oil tankers, let alone other ships, until 1992.
If so, what's more amazing is that it was the largest ship ever made (in terms of length and tonnage) for forty years - well after it was scrapped.
Considering the rate f technological change during the latter half of the Victorian era, it shows just how Brunel's ambition exceeded demand.0 -
Morning all
Thank you for the piece, David, as always and a call perhaps for some of the others on here who always seem to have plenty to say on a daily basis to put up a thread and continue the debate.
The truth is that it is in the interests of all the existing parties to squash any new intruder since potentially a successful new party is an existential threat if not to the other parties themselves than to the political order.
The SDP was an existential threat to Labour, Conservatives and indeed the Liberal Party and changed all three of them directly or indirectly.
The most successful "new" party of recent times has been the SNP which in 2015 didn't just break the Con-Lab-Lib domination of Scottish politics but shattered it. Whatever we may think of the SNP it has had a profound effect on both Scottish and British politics and has changed the other parties' approach to Scotland fundamentally.
UKIP fundamentally changed British politics as a single issue party which not only got what it wanted but also got the result it wanted in the referendum (and would have done so even if it hadn't).
So new parties can be successful and change things but not perhaps in as direct and obvious way as might be supposed. They become agents of change not in themselves but in the way they affect the existing parties and how said parties respond to them.
0 -
And earning the £115k Chappers used to earn to boot.TheScreamingEagles said:
It would be saner than the appointment of Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff to David Davis at DExEU.JonnyJimmy said:Who thinks we should appoint our very own Glenn & Eagles team as joint Chiefs of Staff to PB's Brexit department? It seems as sane as Chapman's employment at Dexeu..
0 -
-
As far as stopping - or at least seriously diluting - Brexit is concerned the swing constituency comprises the Remain Conservatives - fundamentally loyal types like Nicholas Soames, for example. Assuming that Labour behaves opportunistically as with Maastricht and opposes Brexit in practice but not principle, Tory backbenchers are the ones who, if approached in right way, could possibly have some impact.williamglenn said:The focus shouldn't be on the idea of a Democrats party. The real issue is that Brexit can, must and will be stopped, and that some mechanism will need to be found to do it. If a new party isn't going to work for various reasons, it means that MPs within the existing party structure need to summon up some courage to start telling some home truths to Leave voters.
0 -
That's peanuts, especially for living in London.GIN1138 said:
And earning the £115k Chappers used to earn to boot.TheScreamingEagles said:
It would be saner than the appointment of Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff to David Davis at DExEU.JonnyJimmy said:Who thinks we should appoint our very own Glenn & Eagles team as joint Chiefs of Staff to PB's Brexit department? It seems as sane as Chapman's employment at Dexeu..
Move DExEU to Manchester, and I might be interested.0 -
Utter nonsense. A silly attempt to ignore the result by playing politics underlines the level of hypocrisy in politics. The reason for the vote is actually irrelevant to the result. I voted remain and regret the result but I accept that it revealed a gigantic fissure in British politics which the recent GE confirmed in abundance. Both have shattered the consensus of the 'chatterers ' that only they have their fingers on the pulse. truth is they know 'jackshit' just like the rest of this. their continued petulance and raging against the temerity of the people in confounding their expectations is both profoundly amusing and depressing at the same time.nielh said:
Absolutely. Both Cameron and May are guilty of putting party before country. It could well destroy the conservative party.MikeSmithson said:
So you think TMay was right to trigger A50 when she had no plan at all over the intricacies involved?TonyE said:
Probably his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
What qualifications do you have to sit in judgement over the "brightness" of Chapman?Casino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
My sense is that Chapman is both full of hot air - and not as bright or insightful as he thinks he is - and was encouraged to unleash himself and grab the airwaves by George Osborne.
But, aside from boosting the morale of ultra-Remainers and providing them with entertainment, nothing will come of it and it will be quickly overtaken by events.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:
Do you mean Chapman? Or is there some other twitterati called Shipman helping him along?MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
The two guilty people of this whole saga are Cameron for agreeing to the referendum and TMay. They are the ones should be blamed for making us all poorer and taking away some of our freedoms.
Chapman is right on this count.0 -
.
The problem with this is the nature of the A50 process. Negotiations are now underway between HMG and the EU27 and there is no role for Parliament in this until HMG comes back with a deal. Parliament's only options then are to either accept the deal or reject it, which would mean that we Leave with no deal at all.PeterC said:
As far as stopping - or at least seriously diluting - Brexit is concerned the swing constituency comprises the Remain Conservatives - fundamentally loyal types like Nicholas Soames, for example. Assuming that Labour behaves opportunistically as with Maastricht and opposes Brexit in practice but not principle, Tory backbenchers are the ones who, if approached in right way, could possibly have some impact.williamglenn said:The focus shouldn't be on the idea of a Democrats party. The real issue is that Brexit can, must and will be stopped, and that some mechanism will need to be found to do it. If a new party isn't going to work for various reasons, it means that MPs within the existing party structure need to summon up some courage to start telling some home truths to Leave voters.
Unless you seriously think the A50 negotiations can yield two deals for Parlaiment to choose between.0 -
-
On topic, I didn't expect this from James Chapman, personally I'd be focusing all my efforts on this, because we'd all love another Brexit related court case.
Britain risks a new Brexit fight in international courts if it tries to quit the EU’s single market without giving other countries official notice, The Independent can reveal.
Legal experts, including one who advised the Treasury, agree Theresa May will leave the UK open to legal action in The Hague if she pulls out of the European Economic Area (EEA) without formally telling its other members 12 months in advance, to avoid disrupting their trade.
The notice is demanded by an international agreement, but ministers do not intend to follow the process because, insiders believe, they want to avoid a Commons vote on staying in the EEA – and, therefore, the single market – that they might lose.
As well as the a court battle, experts warn the stigma from breaking the agreement could also make it harder for Britain to secure the trade deals it desperately needs to secure the economy after Brexit.
Pro-EU MPs hope the legal opinion will help persuade the Commons to force and win the vote on staying in the EEA planned for the autumn.
The Government has insisted EEA membership will end automatically with EU withdrawal but former Treasury legal adviser Charles Marquand, said: “A failure by the UK to give notice of its intention to leave would, I think, be a breach of the EEA Agreement, which is an international treaty.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-uk-eu-single-market-quit-international-tribunal-risk-no-formal-notice-europe-a7877436.html0 -
Maybe peanuts to you but your friend Chappers seems upset that Stewart Jackson is earning £115k in *his* job;TheScreamingEagles said:
That's peanuts, especially for living in London.GIN1138 said:
And earning the £115k Chappers used to earn to boot.TheScreamingEagles said:
It would be saner than the appointment of Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff to David Davis at DExEU.JonnyJimmy said:Who thinks we should appoint our very own Glenn & Eagles team as joint Chiefs of Staff to PB's Brexit department? It seems as sane as Chapman's employment at Dexeu..
Move DExEU to Manchester, and I might be interested.
https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/895978929093259264
0 -
I think railway locomotives had a similar exponential increase in the second quarter of the 19th century followed by a stabilisation for much of the rest of the century as steamships did.JosiasJessop said:
The Great Eastern?ydoethur said:
It's a bit harsh to blame WSL for the Brittanic being hit by a torpedo. It's also worth remembering Olympic was torpedoed too and survived, although it was probably helped somewhat by the torpedo in question failing to explode!CarlottaVance said:
It was a claim also made - by journalists - of other large liners at the time. Ironically two of the Olympic class sank.....ydoethur said:
In fairness to White Star Line, they never claimed Titanic was unsinkable. They said it was 'practically unsinkable' which was indeed correct.Scott_P said:
The Titanic sailed for hundreds of miles without hitting an iceberg, and is therefore unsinkable...CarlottaVance said:But that catastrophe was predicted for a year ago......and so far, the only catastrophic damage has been to the reputations of those who predicted it.......
On topic, why do Remoaners think predicting catastrophe is going to work this time - when it failed to last time and the predicted catastrophe failed to materialise. Voters were aware there was an economic downside risk when they voted to leave.......
There was of course one ship even before the Titanic that survived a series of disastrous accidents including the breaking of its rudder during a major storm and the tearing of a gash 85 feet long and about 8-9 feet wide in its side, partly because it was double hulled. If not unsinkable, it certainly proved to be damned hard to sink, and indeed when it was broken up it took something like two years to scrap. It is quite stunning to reflect this was not even compulsory on oil tankers, let alone other ships, until 1992.
If so, what's more amazing is that it was the largest ship ever made (in terms of length and tonnage) for forty years - well after it was scrapped.
Considering the rate f technological change during the latter half of the Victorian era, it shows just how Brunel's ambition exceeded demand.
Similar technology of course.0 -
It is almost impossible, as you explain.ThreeQuidder said:.
The problem with this is the nature of the A50 process. Negotiations are now underway between HMG and the EU27 and there is no role for Parliament in this until HMG comes back with a deal. Parliament's only options then are to either accept the deal or reject it, which would mean that we Leave with no deal at all.PeterC said:
As far as stopping - or at least seriously diluting - Brexit is concerned the swing constituency comprises the Remain Conservatives - fundamentally loyal types like Nicholas Soames, for example. Assuming that Labour behaves opportunistically as with Maastricht and opposes Brexit in practice but not principle, Tory backbenchers are the ones who, if approached in right way, could possibly have some impact.williamglenn said:The focus shouldn't be on the idea of a Democrats party. The real issue is that Brexit can, must and will be stopped, and that some mechanism will need to be found to do it. If a new party isn't going to work for various reasons, it means that MPs within the existing party structure need to summon up some courage to start telling some home truths to Leave voters.
Unless you seriously think the A50 negotiations can yield two deals for Parlaiment to choose between.
If there were a 'no deal' or a 'deal rejected' or 'deal not ratified' scenario and a disorderly exit loomed, I could imagine a last ditch desparate call for the revocation of A50. The fireworks will come at the end, and until then there will be much smoke without fire.0 -
Alternative translation:PeterC said:
As far as stopping - or at least seriously diluting - Brexit is concerned the swing constituency comprises the Remain Conservatives - fundamentally loyal types like Nicholas Soames, for example. Assuming that Labour behaves opportunistically as with Maastricht and opposes Brexit in practice but not principle, Tory backbenchers are the ones who, if approached in right way, could possibly have some impact.williamglenn said:The focus shouldn't be on the idea of a Democrats party. The real issue is that Brexit can, must and will be stopped, and that some mechanism will need to be found to do it. If a new party isn't going to work for various reasons, it means that MPs within the existing party structure need to summon up some courage to start telling some home truths to Leave voters.
MPs, ~70% of whom are Remain-inclined, need to think for themselves and temporarily tell whips and voters to f*** off. In safe seats - probably 500 - they could permanently ignore voters if they think an opposite policy is in the national interest ... a bizarre aspect of FPTP.
Probably >80% of Labour MPs are Europhiles. Even lefties like Livingstone changed their mind over time. Corbyn, McD are some of the few who didn't, along with Skinner and mavericks like Hoey or Field.0 -
To be honest, a lot of Leavers, including a few on PB, who are upset at Stewart Jackson having that role.GIN1138 said:
Maybe peanuts to you but your friend Chappers seems upset that Stewart Jackson is earning £115k in *his* job;TheScreamingEagles said:
That's peanuts, especially for living in London.GIN1138 said:
And earning the £115k Chappers used to earn to boot.TheScreamingEagles said:
It would be saner than the appointment of Stewart Jackson as Chief of Staff to David Davis at DExEU.JonnyJimmy said:Who thinks we should appoint our very own Glenn & Eagles team as joint Chiefs of Staff to PB's Brexit department? It seems as sane as Chapman's employment at Dexeu..
Move DExEU to Manchester, and I might be interested.
https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/8959789290932592640 -
It was a 20+ year campaign of infiltration and subversion of democracy that would have made Militant blush. People like Daniel Hannan should never have been allowed anywhere near the Conservative party.Mortimer said:
Putting things on buses must been covered in PhD courses - it is the only explanation.Alanbrooke said:
unpleasant intellectual vacuumsAlastairMeeks said:On topic, I would not expect a third party, still less one led by James Chapman. He's obviously enjoyed a few days of settling scores with the assorted loonies, opportunists and careerists that comprise the Leave camp, and exposed many of them for the unpleasant intellectual vacuums that they are. But new parties aren't led by obscure journalists and James Chapman will know that as well as anyone. He's just having holiday fun.
but they still outwitted Remain
how do you explain that ?0 -
Why hold the referendum with no plan to leave? Cameron. Cameron. CAMERON. Thought he would win by starving the idea of leaving of oxygen.felix said:
Utter nonsense. A silly attempt to ignore the result by playing politics underlines the level of hypocrisy in politics. The reason for the vote is actually irrelevant to the result. I voted remain and regret the result but I accept that it revealed a gigantic fissure in British politics which the recent GE confirmed in abundance. Both have shattered the consensus of the 'chatterers ' that only they have their fingers on the pulse. truth is they know 'jackshit' just like the rest of this. their continued petulance and raging against the temerity of the people in confounding their expectations is both profoundly amusing and depressing at the same time.nielh said:
Absolutely. Both Cameron and May are guilty of putting party before country. It could well destroy the conservative party.MikeSmithson said:
ms.TonyE said:
his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
WhatCasino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
Chapman is right on this count.
Why hold a completely pointless election after triggering article 50, losing 2+ months of negotatiating time? Her best answer to why people should vote for her was that the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn, in a situation she had created herself.
I also voted remain but also accept the result. I am not actually angry at people who voted leave, or the leave campaign because I can see that they were forced in to taking the position that they took because of the way that Cameron framed the referendum. I felt ashamed and humiliated to be handing out stronger in patronising propoganda to people, but had no choice. Cameron also lost the referendum because his campaign was so shit that no one wanted to be associated with it. In this town I count about 10 out of 100,000 people who did any significant work for stronger in. It energised 0.0001% of the population.
As for Theresa May, I truly revel in the absolutely pathetic and humilliated figure she now cuts. Ditto for Cameron.
This may actually kill the conservative party.
0 -
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
So let's 'accept democracy' for a moment. What would you do about Northern Ireland in Theresa May's position?ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
As we all know though the EU are quite happy to bend their own processes if required to get the result they want.ThreeQuidder said:
The problem with this is the nature of the A50 process. Negotiations are now underway between HMG and the EU27 and there is no role for Parliament in this until HMG comes back with a deal. Parliament's only options then are to either accept the deal or reject it, which would mean that we Leave with no deal at all.
Unless you seriously think the A50 negotiations can yield two deals for Parlaiment to choose between.
I suspect that IF an initial deal were rejected by the Commons, the A50 timetable would be extended (using some loophole) to ensure a deal acceptable to both the EU and the UK was achieved even if it took a few extra weeks or months.0 -
We occasionally have an offbeat competition in PB - I remember one that I initiated where we had to say something sincerely positive about opponents - and I wonder if this would be a good August distraction. Something you've done in an election or referendum that you really feel embarrassed about.nielh said:
I felt ashamed and humiliated to be handing out stronger in patronising propoganda to people, but had no choice.
My contribution: I remember delivering leaflets on election day which were of course preprinted and which alleged that "early indications from the polling stations show that the result is very close". Squirm. I delivered them for half an hour and then shame finally overcame me and I slunk back to HQ and asked if I could deliver something else.
I expect I could think of some more if others do their bit...
0 -
ms.
Absolutely. Both Cameron and May are guilty of putting party before country. It could well destroy the conservative party.
Chapman is right on this count.
Utter nonsense. A silly attempt to ignore the result by playing politics underlines the level of hypocrisy in politics. The reason for the vote is actually irrelevant to the result. I voted remain and regret the result but I accept that it revealed a gigantic fissure in British politics which the recent GE confirmed in abundance. Both have shattered the consensus of the 'chatterers ' that only they have their fingers on the pulse. truth is they know 'jackshit' just like the rest of this. their continued petulance and raging against the temerity of the people in confounding their expectations is both profoundly amusing and depressing at the same time.
Why hold the referendum with no plan to leave? Cameron. Cameron. CAMERON. Thought he would win by starving the idea of leaving of oxygen.
Why hold a completely pointless election after triggering article 50, losing 2+ months of negotatiating time? Her best answer to why people should vote for her was that the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn, in a situation she had created herself.
I also voted remain but also accept the result. I am not actually angry at people who voted leave, or the leave campaign because I can see that they were forced in to taking the position that they took because of the way that Cameron framed the referendum. I felt ashamed and humiliated to be handing out stronger in patronising propoganda to people, but had no choice. Cameron also lost the referendum because his campaign was so shit that no one wanted to be associated with it. In this town I count about 10 out of 100,000 people who did any significant work for stronger in. It energised 0.0001% of the population.
As for Theresa May, I truly revel in the absolutely pathetic and humilliated figure she now cuts. Ditto for Cameron.
This may actually kill the conservative party.
Of course hate, anger and the desire for revenge and blame are so much easier than truly accepting the result and striving to get a good deal. Many in the press are so angry they will countenance criticism and derision only for Britain in the negotiation while the EU is elevated to a level of superlative benignity which is frankly embarrassing - they can do no wrong. Regarding your 'prediction - hope?' for the Tories a cursory glance at history would suggest it may be doomed to further disappointment.0 -
That's what happened when the UKThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
abolished hanging
legalised abortion
legalised some homosexual acts
in the 1960s.
AKA: MPs are representatives not delegates.
50 years later, Roy Jenkins, David Steel, Leo Abse, Sidney Silverman and others are generally seen as heroes for having pioneered liberal legislation.0 -
Some of us believe in 'accepting democracy' for rather more than a moment.williamglenn said:
So let's 'accept democracy' for a moment. What would you do about Northern Ireland in Theresa May's position?ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
A fair point. I'll divide my answer into parts, to not take up too much spaceanother_richard said:They've not made me poorer. I'm much better off that I was 18 months ago and so are probably most other people with a defined contributions pension plan.I'm not aware of these freedoms you say I've lost either.
0 -
Which of those went against a referendum?rural_voter said:
That's what happened when the UKThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
abolished hanging
legalised abortion
legalised some homosexual acts
in the 1960s.0 -
@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.0 -
UKIP allows Anne Marie Waters to stand:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/12/anti-islam-campaigner-approved-candidate-ukip-leadership-election/0 -
They may find the complement is returned.rural_voter said:PeterC said:
As far as stopping - or at least seriously diluting - Brexit is concerned the swing constituency comprises the Remain Conservatives - fundamentally loyal types like Nicholas Soames, for example. Assuming that Labour behaves opportunistically as with Maastricht and opposes Brexit in practice but not principle, Tory backbenchers are the ones who, if approached in right way, could possibly have some impact.williamglenn said:The focus shouldn't be on the idea of a Democrats party. The real issue is that Brexit can, must and will be stopped, and that some mechanism will need to be found to do it. If a new party isn't going to work for various reasons, it means that MPs within the existing party structure need to summon up some courage to start telling some home truths to Leave voters.
MPs..... need to tell ..... voters to f*** off.
Ask former Scottish Labour MPs about 'safe' seats......0 -
That's an interesting comparison, and my instinct - and it is little more than that - is that it's wrong, and that the size and power of steam locomotives increased throughout the Victorian period. Except on the Midland, of course.another_richard said:I think railway locomotives had a similar exponential increase in the second quarter of the 19th century followed by a stabilisation for much of the rest of the century as steamships did.
Similar technology of course.
The problem with the Great Eastern is that it was so far ahead of its time, that there was not really a business case for it. In fact, it only really found success as a cable layer. They could have built a similarly-sized ship in those intervening years, but there was little point.0 -
So you're saying I've got poorer ?viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
Do you know how the value of my pension funds, investments, banks balances have changed ?
No you don't.
Believe me I can buy many more fish fingers now that I could 18 months ago.0 -
For those who support the EU superstate, yes..ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
PART 2: TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTLY?viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
There is an ongoing argument between me and Philip Thompson of this parish, which usually ends with me quoting GBP/USD back to 2000. He represents the idea that the fall in the pound is like the 1992 ERM exit and will be temporary as industry expands to take advantage of export opportunities. I represent the idea that it is like the 1967 devaluation and will be permanent, causing inflation to work its way thru the system over the next five-ten years as industry fails to pick up. I do not know which of us are right as it is too early to tell, but I am not sanguine.0 -
Unless your income growth exceeded the value of the poind's fall - mine has. Export growth has been big this year.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.0 -
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
20+ years of peacefully arguing our corner, and persuading the undecided. Exactly what democracy is about.williamglenn said:
It was a 20+ year campaign of infiltration and subversion of democracy that would have made Militant blush. People like Daniel Hannan should never have been allowed anywhere near the Conservative party.Mortimer said:
Putting things on buses must been covered in PhD courses - it is the only explanation.Alanbrooke said:
unpleasant intellectual vacuumsAlastairMeeks said:On topic, I would not expect a third party, still less one led by James Chapman. He's obviously enjoyed a few days of settling scores with the assorted loonies, opportunists and careerists that comprise the Leave camp, and exposed many of them for the unpleasant intellectual vacuums that they are. But new parties aren't led by obscure journalists and James Chapman will know that as well as anyone. He's just having holiday fun.
but they still outwitted Remain
how do you explain that ?0 -
Not winning doesn't mean you're disenfranchised.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance, and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
Are you going to disavow liberalism as well? That is party of your favoured party's name too, right?Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
Could you reword that to make it sound a bit more patronizing, please? I think many readers of this site will already understand the concepts of inflation and exchange rates. I for one am richer than i was on 23 June last year, even after adjusting for inflation.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.0 -
Certainly steam locomotives would have improved after the 1850s but I'd guess the rate of improvement would have been slower than in the decades before.JosiasJessop said:
That's an interesting comparison, and my instinct - and it is little more than that - is that it's wrong, and that the size and power of steam locomotives increased throughout the Victorian period. Except on the Midland, of course.another_richard said:I think railway locomotives had a similar exponential increase in the second quarter of the 19th century followed by a stabilisation for much of the rest of the century as steamships did.
Similar technology of course.
The problem with the Great Eastern is that it was so far ahead of its time, that there was not really a business case for it. In fact, it only really found success as a cable layer. They could have built a similarly-sized ship in those intervening years, but there was little point.
You're right about the Great Eastern, in fact I'd describe it more as a vanity project of an engineering genius than a serious ship. Wasn't it designed to carry 4000 passengers ? Has a ship been designed to carry more than that since ?0 -
PART 3: RIGHTS AND THE LOSING OF THEMviewcode said:
PART 2: TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTLY?viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
There is an ongoing argument between me and Philip Thompson of this parish, which usually ends with me quoting GBP/USD back to 2000. He represents the idea that the fall in the pound is like the 1992 ERM exit and will be temporary as industry expands to take advantage of export opportunities. I represent the idea that it is like the 1967 devaluation and will be permanent, causing inflation to work its way thru the system over the next five-ten years as industry fails to pick up. I do not know which of us are right as it is too early to tell, but I am not sanguine.
You currently have the right to work in 27 other countries and operate under the protection of European legal protections (the ECHR, the ECJ and other bobbins beginning with E). Post Brexit you will not have those rights. Also if the Times is correct, the Government would like to remove the right to sue the Government, which would have shocked me had I been innocent to believe in its goodness.
Whether you consider those rights to be valuable is a value judgement I leave to you. But whether you will lose them is not. And currently it appears that you will.0 -
It will be uncomfortable reading for campaigners and politicians hoping the referendum decision could be reversed.
Dr Leeper said: "People aren't regretting their vote choice, they're not regretting the decision of the people to leave. Even Remain voters are reasonably favourable towards outcomes that wouldn't necessarily be categorised as Remain positions by, perhaps, the media
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-29-remain-voters-accept-deport-eu-citizens-must-leave-study-lse-oxford-a7889241.html0 -
You do realise that in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner?Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
There ought to be a bigger element of honesty.Sean_F said:
20+ years of peacefully arguing our corner, and persuading the undecided. Exactly what democracy is about.williamglenn said:
It was a 20+ year campaign of infiltration and subversion of democracy that would have made Militant blush. People like Daniel Hannan should never have been allowed anywhere near the Conservative party.Mortimer said:
Putting things on buses must been covered in PhD courses - it is the only explanation.Alanbrooke said:
unpleasant intellectual vacuumsAlastairMeeks said:On topic, I would not expect a third party, still less one led by James Chapman. He's obviously enjoyed a few days of settling scores with the assorted loonies, opportunists and careerists that comprise the Leave camp, and exposed many of them for the unpleasant intellectual vacuums that they are. But new parties aren't led by obscure journalists and James Chapman will know that as well as anyone. He's just having holiday fun.
but they still outwitted Remain
how do you explain that ?
IMHO, anyway.
0 -
Presumably you're going to add a piece about the increased rights we'll regain. The rights to make (and repeal) our own laws. The rights to a seat at the table of international trade bodies. The rights to evict from power those who govern us at every level of government.viewcode said:
PART 3: RIGHTS AND THE LOSING OF THEMviewcode said:
PART 2: TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTLY?viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
There is an ongoing argument between me and Philip Thompson of this parish, which usually ends with me quoting GBP/USD back to 2000. He represents the idea that the fall in the pound is like the 1992 ERM exit and will be temporary as industry expands to take advantage of export opportunities. I represent the idea that it is like the 1967 devaluation and will be permanent, causing inflation to work its way thru the system over the next five-ten years as industry fails to pick up. I do not know which of us are right as it is too early to tell, but I am not sanguine.
You currently have the right to work in 27 other countries and operate under the protection of European legal protections (the ECHR, the ECJ and other bobbins beginning with E). Post Brexit you will not have those rights. Also if the Times is correct, the Government would like to remove the right to sue the Government, which would have shocked me had I been innocent to believe in its goodness.
Whether you consider those rights to be valuable is a value judgement I leave to you. But whether you will lose them is not. And currently it appears that you will.0 -
Applies to both sides of this one, of course.OldKingCole said:
There ought to be a bigger element of honesty.Sean_F said:
20+ years of peacefully arguing our corner, and persuading the undecided. Exactly what democracy is about.williamglenn said:
It was a 20+ year campaign of infiltration and subversion of democracy that would have made Militant blush. People like Daniel Hannan should never have been allowed anywhere near the Conservative party.Mortimer said:
Putting things on buses must been covered in PhD courses - it is the only explanation.Alanbrooke said:
unpleasant intellectual vacuumsAlastairMeeks said:On topic, I would not expect a third party, still less one led by James Chapman. He's obviously enjoyed a few days of settling scores with the assorted loonies, opportunists and careerists that comprise the Leave camp, and exposed many of them for the unpleasant intellectual vacuums that they are. But new parties aren't led by obscure journalists and James Chapman will know that as well as anyone. He's just having holiday fun.
but they still outwitted Remain
how do you explain that ?
IMHO, anyway.0 -
King Cole, indeed.
If Brown had kept his manifesto promise on a referendum, we would've voted down Lisbon. I suspect many people, perhaps a majority, would far prefer that situation to the current one.0 -
Not even those who choose not to vote are "disenfranchised".Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.
The word does not mean what you seem to think it means.0 -
Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer.Ishmael_Z said:
Could you reword that to make it sound a bit more patronizing, please? I think many readers of this site will already understand the concepts of inflation and exchange rates. I for one am richer than i was on 23 June last year, even after adjusting for inflation.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.
The fact is under almost any circumstance there will be some people whose asset values are increasing and/or whose incomes are increasing higher than their cost of living.
Over the last year both of those have applied to me.0 -
Just as there is no right that the winner you vote for must succeed. If the people voted for a socialist paradise, you would be the first to point out that they're not going to get it.ThreeQuidder said:
You do realise that in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner?Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
0 -
I was certainly not patronising anybody. I was explaining as simply as I could a phenomenon which I believe most people have forgotten. If @another_richard was offended by it I am sure he will make it known.Ishmael_Z said:Could you reword that to make it sound a bit more patronizing, please?.
0 -
Don't know whether people have followed the Google 'diversity memo row/sacking' - but having read the memo - I think this summary is right on who should be fired:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html?_r=00 -
I imagine on average it did not, as I think people did not get a 10-20% pay rise this year. If you did, then congratulations and I hope you buy the drinks at the next PB meet...Mortimer said:
Unless your income growth exceeded the value of the poind's fall - mine has. Export growth has been big this year.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment. -1 -
I keep reading this from Remainers and I keep asking the same questions with no response, so I'll try again.MikeSmithson said:
So you think TMay was right to trigger A50 when she had no plan at all over the intricacies involved?TonyE said:
Probably his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
What qualifications do you have to sit in judgement over the "brightness" of Chapman?Casino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
My sense is that Chapman is both full of hot air - and not as bright or insightful as he thinks he is - and was encouraged to unleash himself and grab the airwaves by George Osborne.
But, aside from boosting the morale of ultra-Remainers and providing them with entertainment, nothing will come of it and it will be quickly overtaken by events.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:
Do you mean Chapman? Or is there some other twitterati called Shipman helping him along?MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
The two guilty people of this whole saga are Cameron for agreeing to the referendum and TMay. They are the ones should be blamed for making us all poorer and taking away some of our freedoms.
Please clarify how we're "all poorer" and please expand on "freedoms" have been taken away from us.0 -
Forgotten the concept of inflation? LOL.viewcode said:
I was certainly not patronising anybody. I was explaining as simply as I could a phenomenon which I believe most people have forgotten. If @another_richard was offended by it I am sure he will make it known.Ishmael_Z said:Could you reword that to make it sound a bit more patronizing, please?.
0 -
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
Socialist paradise update: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/8963152798982717440
-
"Rights" is a loaded term and implies something fundamental and profound like free speech or self defence. These are not "rights" in any deep sense. They are no more than abilities or bureaucratic concessions.viewcode said:
PART 3: RIGHTS AND THE LOSING OF THEMviewcode said:
PART 2: TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTLY?viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
There is an ongoing argument between me and Philip Thompson of this parish, which usually ends with me quoting GBP/USD back to 2000. He represents the idea that the fall in the pound is like the 1992 ERM exit and will be temporary as industry expands to take advantage of export opportunities. I represent the idea that it is like the 1967 devaluation and will be permanent, causing inflation to work its way thru the system over the next five-ten years as industry fails to pick up. I do not know which of us are right as it is too early to tell, but I am not sanguine.
You currently have the right to work in 27 other countries and operate under the protection of European legal protections (the ECHR, the ECJ and other bobbins beginning with E). Post Brexit you will not have those rights. Also if the Times is correct, the Government would like to remove the right to sue the Government, which would have shocked me had I been innocent to believe in its goodness.
Whether you consider those rights to be valuable is a value judgement I leave to you. But whether you will lose them is not. And currently it appears that you will.
You use the word "lose" but that implies that I want to keep these things ... I have actively campaigned for decades against these paperwork gimmicks. I want to get rid of them.
In exchange I will gain a real "right" ... that of freedom and liberty to govern.0 -
On average, over the last year, I suspect you're right. Over the coming decades it will, I suspect, lead to relative income growth on PPP. But you were telling me I got poorer. And I wanted to correct you.viewcode said:
I imagine on average it did not, as I think people did not get a 10-20% pay rise this year. If you did, then congratulations and I hope you buy the drinks at the next PB meet...Mortimer said:
Unless your income growth exceeded the value of the poind's fall - mine has. Export growth has been big this year.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.
0 -
Does anyone have a list of what would have been the biggest ships in the world from the 1860s if the Great Eastern had not been built ?another_richard said:
Certainly steam locomotives would have improved after the 1850s but I'd guess the rate of improvement would have been slower than in the decades before.JosiasJessop said:
That's an interesting comparison, and my instinct - and it is little more than that - is that it's wrong, and that the size and power of steam locomotives increased throughout the Victorian period. Except on the Midland, of course.another_richard said:I think railway locomotives had a similar exponential increase in the second quarter of the 19th century followed by a stabilisation for much of the rest of the century as steamships did.
Similar technology of course.
The problem with the Great Eastern is that it was so far ahead of its time, that there was not really a business case for it. In fact, it only really found success as a cable layer. They could have built a similarly-sized ship in those intervening years, but there was little point.
You're right about the Great Eastern, in fact I'd describe it more as a vanity project of an engineering genius than a serious ship. Wasn't it designed to carry 4000 passengers ? Has a ship been designed to carry more than that since ?0 -
And there was me thinking you wanted a civilized conversation. Silly me.another_richard said:Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.
That's true of most events, even disastrous ones. Some people made a profit out of the sinking of the Titanic but on average it was quite bad for the passengers.another_richard said:The fact is under almost any circumstance there will be some people whose asset values are increasing and/or whose incomes are increasing higher than their cost of living.
Congratulations.another_richard said:Over the last year both of those have applied to me.
0 -
Sounds like Venezuela is "Crushing The Saboteurs" ?Morris_Dancer said:Socialist paradise update: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/896315279898271744
0 -
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.
I think its fairly clear that the elite - and both parties - have ignored voters concerns about immigration for too long - so it took this brick through the window now will you listen? to put it right - and in fairness I think May also gets that this vote was about more than the EU......0 -
We are all poorer. The value of our currency has collapsed which the Brexit Jihadists seem to ignore.
In international terms our spending power is down nearly 20%.0 -
Miss Vance, keeping one eye on it. Free speech is becoming a battleground on the interweb.0
-
Which is a self-congratulatory and superficial argument. There are many examples of 'errors' in the UK system that are left to fester because they are seen as too difficult and so we waste decades ignoring them.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.0 -
A little advice then - lecturing people about their financial situation when you don't know any of their details would not be regarded as civilised among the people I know.viewcode said:
And there was me thinking you wanted a civilized conversation. Silly me.another_richard said:Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.
So yes, silly you.
And now I have some work to do.0 -
And as some of us have pointed out, it is entirely possible to have increased your income 20% in that time.MikeSmithson said:We are all poorer. The value of our currency has collapsed which the Brexit Jihadists seem to ignore.
In international terms our spending power is down nearly 20%.
Mine has, for example. Because my domestically sourced products are cheaper to purchase for the rest of the world.0 -
Sure about that? In the 21st century we've had small inflation and for the past decade it's been tiny. People react with horror over interest rates rising to the giddy heights of three whole percent. But there have been times n the past when inflation's been 5%pa, 10%, 15%,...Ishmael_Z said:
Forgotten the concept of inflation? LOL.viewcode said:
I was certainly not patronising anybody. I was explaining as simply as I could a phenomenon which I believe most people have forgotten. If @another_richard was offended by it I am sure he will make it known.Ishmael_Z said:Could you reword that to make it sound a bit more patronizing, please?.
So, although you're right when you imply that inflation is known to exist, I think I'm right when I say that we have forgotten how high it can be. I think even a rate of 5% would cause problems. YMMV, of course.0 -
Fair enough.Mortimer said:
On average, over the last year, I suspect you're right. Over the coming decades it will, I suspect, lead to relative income growth on PPP. But you were telling me I got poorer. And I wanted to correct you.viewcode said:
I imagine on average it did not, as I think people did not get a 10-20% pay rise this year. If you did, then congratulations and I hope you buy the drinks at the next PB meet...Mortimer said:
Unless your income growth exceeded the value of the poind's fall - mine has. Export growth has been big this year.viewcode said:@another_richard
PART 1: DID YOU GET RICHER OR POORER?
You got poorer. The trick is the fall in the value of the pound. It's not the number of pounds you have, it's the number of things you can buy with them. In the 70's Conservatives railed against "money illusion": the concept that people were fooled by an increase in their nominal wealth (the amount of pounds they have) masking a drop in their actual wealth (the things you can buy with them). 21st century low inflation has made us forget that lesson, to our detriment.0 -
I don't think collapse means what you think it means. Perhaps the Russian Rouble in 2014, or the Venezuelan Bolivar for the foreseeable future, but a sub 20% devaluation in no way qualifies. In any case, the value of sterling has only been propped up by the U.K. selling ever more of its assets abroad and accumulating greater foreign debts. That can't go on forever.MikeSmithson said:We are all poorer. The value of our currency has collapsed which the Brexit Jihadists seem to ignore.
In international terms our spending power is down nearly 20%.
Comparing Brexiteers to jihadists is hilarious. Aren't you funny?0 -
I must say, I'm starting to love this Chapman fellow. He's a genuine subversive who's set politics ablaze. Leave now has an unpleasant smell about it - that of failure, ineptitude and a tired old establishment just about clinging on. Remain in contrast appears focused and reinvigorated. Brexit can't and won't be reversed, but who'll want to stick with that burping charabanc when there's so much fun to be had on the other side?0
-
The google engineer that got fired is another worrying straw in the wind...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-was-fired-by-google-1502481290
He seems quite an odd dude, but then lots of people in tech are. The point is he wrote a discussion paper with citations to peer reviewed academic work, which then somebody stripped of the citations / edited and leaked to make it appear like he was simply ranting against diversity. Google higher ups have seen the original document and decided that firing him is the right course of action.0 -
Mr. Viewcode, indeed, the bed-wetting over 3% inflation is bloody baffling.
It's now around 2.6%. Barely above target.0 -
What do you see as the Eu's 'error correction' systems?williamglenn said:
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
One small example: estimates vary as to how much of the City will be lost because of Brexit, maybe between 10-20%. Jobs and firms are moving to places like Dublin and there will be no 'passporting' for finance (even the City's lobbyists have given up on winning that one apparently).freetochoose said:
I keep reading this from Remainers and I keep asking the same questions with no response, so I'll try again.MikeSmithson said:
So you think TMay was right to trigger A50 when she had no plan at all over the intricacies involved?TonyE said:
Probably his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
What qualifications do you have to sit in judgement over the "brightness" of Chapman?Casino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
My sense is that Chapman is both full of hot air - and not as bright or insightful as he thinks he is - and was encouraged to unleash himself and grab the airwaves by George Osborne.
But, aside from boosting the morale of ultra-Remainers and providing them with entertainment, nothing will come of it and it will be quickly overtaken by events.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:
Do you mean Chapman? Or is there some other twitterati called Shipman helping him along?MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
The two guilty people of this whole saga are Cameron for agreeing to the referendum and TMay. They are the ones should be blamed for making us all poorer and taking away some of our freedoms.
Please clarify how we're "all poorer" and please expand on "freedoms" have been taken away from us.
£70b a year comes from City and banking industry in tax etc.
That's 3/4 of the NHS budget.
So the NHS is going to cope with a 10% or even 20% cut?0 -
Remainers still think they're great, and should have won, episode 1246.Stark_Dawning said:I must say, I'm starting to love this Chapman fellow. He's a genuine subversive who's set politics ablaze. Leave now has an unpleasant smell about it - that of failure, ineptitude and a tired old establishment just about clinging on. Remain in contrast appears focused and reinvigorated. Brexit can't and won't be reversed, but who'll want to stick with that burping charabanc when there's so much fun to be had on the other side?
0 -
People may say that cultural values and sovereignty trump finance and economics. Fair enough, but I can't for the life of me see how Brexit will not leave us, as a nation, poorer.
I just don't buy a word of all this about free to trade with the rest of the world. It won't be a big enough difference to make up what we lose.0 -
-
I think his wife may have done an "intervention" though.Stark_Dawning said:I must say, I'm starting to love this Chapman fellow. He's a genuine subversive who's set politics ablaze. Leave now has an unpleasant smell about it - that of failure, ineptitude and a tired old establishment just about clinging on. Remain in contrast appears focused and reinvigorated. Brexit can't and won't be reversed, but who'll want to stick with that burping charabanc when there's so much fun to be had on the other side?
He has not tweeted for 13 hours now.0 -
A good example of error correction!rottenborough said:
I think his wife may have done an "intervention" though.Stark_Dawning said:I must say, I'm starting to love this Chapman fellow. He's a genuine subversive who's set politics ablaze. Leave now has an unpleasant smell about it - that of failure, ineptitude and a tired old establishment just about clinging on. Remain in contrast appears focused and reinvigorated. Brexit can't and won't be reversed, but who'll want to stick with that burping charabanc when there's so much fun to be had on the other side?
He has not tweeted for 13 hours now.0 -
Its worth reading the original memo - its carefully written - he repeatedly makes the point that his comments are about populations and not individuals and any differences between populations might be small while differences between individuals can be much larger.FrancisUrquhart said:The google engineer that got fired is another worrying straw in the wind...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-was-fired-by-google-1502481290
He seems quite an odd dude, but then lots of people in tech are. The point is he wrote a discussion paper with citations to peer reviewed academic work, which then somebody stripped of the citations / edited and leaked to make it appear like he was simply ranting against diversity. Google higher ups have seen the original document and decided that firing him is the right course of action.0 -
Oh ho, I seem to have heard this one before somewhere:
https://twitter.com/UKdemocrat/status/8963219039877079040 -
Power is inherently distributed by the very nature of the EU, so there is never a single point of political failure. In contrast the UK is an extreme example of a top-down union.CarlottaVance said:
What do you see as the Eu's 'error correction' systems?williamglenn said:
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
If, maybe, estimates, its Project Fear revisited.rottenborough said:
One small example: estimates vary as to how much of the City will be lost because of Brexit, maybe between 10-20%. Jobs and firms are moving to places like Dublin and there will be no 'passporting' for finance (even the City's lobbyists have given up on winning that one apparently).freetochoose said:
I keep reading this from Remainers and I keep asking the same questions with no response, so I'll try again.MikeSmithson said:
So you think TMay was right to trigger A50 when she had no plan at all over the intricacies involved?TonyE said:
Probably his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
What qualifications do you have to sit in judgement over the "brightness" of Chapman?Casino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
My sense is that Chapman is both full of hot air - and not as bright or insightful as he thinks he is - and was encouraged to unleash himself and grab the airwaves by George Osborne.
But, aside from boosting the morale of ultra-Remainers and providing them with entertainment, nothing will come of it and it will be quickly overtaken by events.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:
Do you mean Chapman? Or is there some other twitterati called Shipman helping him along?MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
The two guilty people of this whole saga are Cameron for agreeing to the referendum and TMay. They are the ones should be blamed for making us all poorer and taking away some of our freedoms.
Please clarify how we're "all poorer" and please expand on "freedoms" have been taken away from us.
£70b a year comes from City and banking industry in tax etc.
That's 3/4 of the NHS budget.
So the NHS is going to cope with a 10% or even 20% cut?0 -
So in other words, if 'no one is to blame' 'nothing can go wrong'?williamglenn said:
Power is inherently distributed by the very nature of the EU, so there is never a single point of political failure. In contrast the UK is an extreme example of a top-down union.CarlottaVance said:
What do you see as the Eu's 'error correction' systems?williamglenn said:
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
Rubbish. That may be the theory but in practice power is wielded by the Commission and a few large countries.williamglenn said:
Power is inherently distributed by the very nature of the EU, so there is never a single point of political failure. In contrast the UK is an extreme example of a top-down union.CarlottaVance said:
What do you see as the Eu's 'error correction' systems?williamglenn said:
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
Oh boy!rottenborough said:Oh ho, I seem to have heard this one before somewhere:
https://twitter.com/UKdemocrat/status/8963219039877079040 -
Whether you would describe them as rights or something else is a fair discussion, but not to the fact that you have them now and soon you will not.GeoffM said:"Rights" is a loaded term and implies something fundamental and profound like free speech or self defence. These are not "rights" in any deep sense. They are no more than abilities or bureaucratic concessions.
That's your decision and consistent with your previous stance, but my point was relating to things that will be lost.GeoffM said:I have actively campaigned for decades against these paperwork gimmicks. I want to get rid of them.
No, it implies that you have them now and you will not have them in future. If there is a neutral term you would like me to use instead of "lose" please inform me of it, because I confess I'm stuck.GeoffM said:You use the word "lose" but that implies that I want to keep these things ...
0 -
This is an important point and one we have not focussed on. You as an individual have not gained that right (let me go without the scare quotes for the time being), but you have gained the right to do so as part of the collective electorate.GeoffM said:In exchange I will gain a real "right" ... that of freedom and liberty to govern.
I think one of the things underpinning much of Leave's discussion was the word "we". There was the belief that there is an "us" and "we" were facing threats that were best dealt with by "us" leaving the EU, correct?
I'm better with concrete concepts than abstracts and I'm less of a believer in "us" than others: there's a "me", there's a ginormous "family" of relatives by blood and marriage, but beyond that it's a bit of a blur.
So I think I'm correct in saying that you are more comforted by an increase in rights as a collective and I am discomfited by a decrease in rights as an individual. This may explain why we disagree.
0 -
The majority of normal people do not on a day to day basis think in terms of Leave v Remain.Mortimer said:
Remainers still think they're great, and should have won, episode 1246.Stark_Dawning said:I must say, I'm starting to love this Chapman fellow. He's a genuine subversive who's set politics ablaze. Leave now has an unpleasant smell about it - that of failure, ineptitude and a tired old establishment just about clinging on. Remain in contrast appears focused and reinvigorated. Brexit can't and won't be reversed, but who'll want to stick with that burping charabanc when there's so much fun to be had on the other side?
0 -
Coming to the UK if Maomentum get their way.Morris_Dancer said:Socialist paradise update: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/896315279898271744
0 -
Who has more power: Cornwall in the UK, or Luxembourg in the EU?CornishBlue said:
Rubbish. That may be the theory but in practice power is wielded by the Commission and a few large countries.williamglenn said:
Power is inherently distributed by the very nature of the EU, so there is never a single point of political failure. In contrast the UK is an extreme example of a top-down union.CarlottaVance said:
What do you see as the Eu's 'error correction' systems?williamglenn said:
Right now the UK looks much more like a political pressure cooker that could blow at any moment than the EU does.CarlottaVance said:
RCS1000 pointed out a great comment from an eminent physicist before the referendum on why he was voting 'Leave' - basically the UK has evolved reasonably efficient 'error correction' systems - from parliamentary democracy to the judiciary & common law - so when inevitably the ship of state veers off course it is fairly quickly corrected - he believes the EU does not have these systems.Sean_F said:
Democracy facilitates the free flow of ideas, and enables rulers to keep in touch with the grievances of the public. It gives people a stake in the system. It's not perfect, but it tends to deliver better outcomes than the alternative.Barnesian said:
Democracy is not a god to be worshiped. Look at the US variant of democracy and its consequence. Look at the UK with its disproportionate voting system that disenfranchises the majority of voters.ThreeQuidder said:
And that's what we call democracy?rural_voter said:MPs need to tell voters to f*** off.
Referenda are fatally flawed because people vote to have their cake and eat it too - lower taxes and higher public services for instance - and can be easily emotionally swayed at the point of voting by wealthy media owners.
Democracy is a tool that has evolved to avoid bloodshed on the transfer of power. For that it is useful. But it is not the only tool. Power usually transfers at the top of large companies without bloodshed and without democracy. The same in China.
Democracy is a false god. It is a mere tool among many.0 -
I know. It hit 24% in 1975. But memories fade...Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Viewcode, indeed, the bed-wetting over 3% inflation is bloody baffling.
It's now around 2.6%. Barely above target.0 -
Yes, all estimates. Time will tell.freetochoose said:
If, maybe, estimates, its Project Fear revisited.rottenborough said:
One small example: estimates vary as to how much of the City will be lost because of Brexit, maybe between 10-20%. Jobs and firms are moving to places like Dublin and there will be no 'passporting' for finance (even the City's lobbyists have given up on winning that one apparently).freetochoose said:
I keep reading this from Remainers and I keep asking the same questions with no response, so I'll try again.MikeSmithson said:
So you think TMay was right to trigger A50 when she had no plan at all over the intricacies involved?TonyE said:
Probably his twitter feed (which provides ample evidence) and his lack of judgement in posting a naked photo of himself to his instagram feed.MikeSmithson said:
What qualifications do you have to sit in judgement over the "brightness" of Chapman?Casino_Royale said:David is spot on in his assessment.
My sense is that Chapman is both full of hot air - and not as bright or insightful as he thinks he is - and was encouraged to unleash himself and grab the airwaves by George Osborne.
But, aside from boosting the morale of ultra-Remainers and providing them with entertainment, nothing will come of it and it will be quickly overtaken by events.
As to forecasting events perhaps we could look at some of the comments that came from you ahead of 2200 in June 8th.ydoethur said:
Do you mean Chapman? Or is there some other twitterati called Shipman helping him along?MikeSmithson said:Forget the third party part of the Shipman narrative and focus on what he has been saying about the government total lack of preparedness by TMay when she invoked A50. That is the reason why Shipman remains dangerous
The two guilty people of this whole saga are Cameron for agreeing to the referendum and TMay. They are the ones should be blamed for making us all poorer and taking away some of our freedoms.
Please clarify how we're "all poorer" and please expand on "freedoms" have been taken away from us.
£70b a year comes from City and banking industry in tax etc.
That's 3/4 of the NHS budget.
So the NHS is going to cope with a 10% or even 20% cut?
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/03/20/the-biggest-threat-to-the-city-of-london-is-now-uncertainty/0 -
Silly season update: MPs urging Cabinet reshuffle.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/12/theresa-may-urged-carry-mini-reshuffle-next-month-restore-authority/0 -
I listed an explanation of loss of wealth, two lost freedoms and a third possible on the thread below, and there was a follow-on discussion. For the avoidance of doubt I refer to "poorer on average", not "all poorer": as another_richard pointed out, some people will gain.freetochoose said:I keep reading this from Remainers and I keep asking the same questions with no response, so I'll try again.
Please clarify how we're "all poorer" and please expand on "freedoms" have been taken away from us.0 -
Fair enough, and in future I will add caveats like "YMMV" and "...on average...". But your response ("Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.") was unnecessarily rude and made unwarranted assumptions about me.another_richard said:
A little advice then - lecturing people about their financial situation when you don't know any of their details would not be regarded as civilised among the people I know.viewcode said:
And there was me thinking you wanted a civilized conversation. Silly me.another_richard said:Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.
So yes, silly you.
And now I have some work to do.0 -
It's true. It is an article of faith amongst some people who voted Remain. Just look at MSmithson on this thread.viewcode said:
Fair enough, and in future I will add caveats like "YMMV" and "...on average...". But your response ("Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.") was unnecessarily rude and made unwarranted assumptions about me.another_richard said:
A little advice then - lecturing people about their financial situation when you don't know any of their details would not be regarded as civilised among the people I know.viewcode said:
And there was me thinking you wanted a civilized conversation. Silly me.another_richard said:Its a matter of faith among some Remainers that everyone in Britain is now poorer. Reality is not allowed to intrude and no exceptions are tolerated.
So yes, silly you.
And now I have some work to do.0 -
Chavez was an ex colonel though and had the military as does Maduro, Corbyn certainly does notCornishBlue said:
Coming to the UK if Maomentum get their way.Morris_Dancer said:Socialist paradise update: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/896315279898271744
0
