politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chris Rennard’s “Winning Here” – the requiem for the battered

.

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

Was that on 2 USB leads ?
The true markup on their products got exposed with the rise and rise of Amazon.

OldKingCole said:

another_richard said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

The EU is rightly determined, on behalf of 1 of its remaining members, to ensure that the artificial border across Ulster remains (as it currently is) a mere administrative boundary line and does not revert to being a hard border. If the UK wishes to have a hard Brexit, that will not be permitted to apply to the 6 counties, so there would have to be an effective border for trade and people between GB and the 6 counties. Alternatively, the UK as a whole could stay in the CU +/- SM.

Alternatively the Tories could elect Boris as leader given his recent statements accepting some form of limited hard border, we would not get a FTA or transition period post Brexit but it would be enough for the DUP and if Parliament voted to Leave the Customs Union (with the votes of pro Brexit Labour rebels like Campbell, Hopkins, Hoey, Stringer and Field) it would likely have enough support in Parliament.

We SNIP The GFA may also be killed off but with neither the DUP nor SF having agreed to powershare for almost a year it has been on life support for months anyway

The UK as a whole would be on life support if the above happened. Progress towards Scottish independence and Irish re-unification would be accelerated and rUK would be in a desperate economic plight and politically isolated.

The DUP are still the biggest party in NI post Brexit and the SNP also lost almost half their MPs post Brexit

foreigners' eyes.

Its curious that the 'sick man of Europe' has been for decades a net contributor of funds, a net recipient of migrants and a net consumer of goods within the EU.

But good to have it confirmed that foreigners don't like this country.

Check the anti-French posts on here every so often!

LOL - you need to speak to a few French nationals or spend some serious time there.

The French most assuredly dish it out to "les autres"

This is good news on a number of fronts. The jobs, of course; and the fact that the government is very clearly saying very different things in private to what it is saying in public.
https://twitter.com/FinancialTimes/status/968798266434433025

rawzer said:

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Yorkcity said:

felix said:

MikeSmithson said:

Sean_F said:

Roger said:

Why is it that representatives of the EU sound so much brighter and sharper than their British counterparts? I know the residends of Hartlipool prefer Jeremy Kyle to listening to 'Today' on radio 4 but why did we allow these morons to vote when they've never listened to the arguments? Listen at 8.10 and weep


https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/bbc_radio_fourfm

Have you ever met anyone from Hartlepool?

Peter Mandelson was from Hartlepool

No but he went there for the 'guacamole'.

Urban myth , I am afraid .https://harrismp.wordpress.com/2008/10/03/guacamole-gate-mandelson-cleared/

Killjoy.....

There’s a simiar, almost certainly apochryphal one about the cricketer Kevin Pietersen which is too good not to remember. However, I’m not sure that, in consideration of OGH I ought to repeat it here!

I hope the one about the Hartlepool monkey hanging is true

Interestingly when I lived in the NE 60 years ago Hartlepool folk were quite embarrased about the story and could get defensive or aggressive, depending on circumstances. It’s only in the last 20 or so years that they treat it as amusing.

In Dundee both Maplin and Toys R Us are on the same shopping estate. It has Tescos as a key tenant but there were already a number of gaps...

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

A number to.

The people who move from the UK to France and Spain tend to be affluent retirees with moey to spend ie the equivalent of permanent tourists.

That may be so in France, less so in Spain. But they are all big users of public services - and the older they are the more they use them. That is a cost for the host country.

Aren't those healthcare costs recovered from the NHS ?

I don't think there's much doubt that France and Spain are net financial beneficaries from British expats.

The direct healthcare costs are - just as the UK can recover direct healthcare costs from other EU member states.

There is also little doubt that the UK is a net beneficiary from EU immigration.

Agreed. As I said in my post. But there are also costs and the costs and benefits have not been equally or fairly shared, a point which is being overlooked.

Since the Brexit vote, a number of countries have suggested that maybe there ought to be changes to the FoM rules. We shall see what happens.

I would also point out that I am pretty much the only one on here who thinks that letting in Poles and others from Eastern Europe was a good thing, for moral reasons as much as anything else. Britain acted far more in the spirit of Europe than did France and Germany so it rather sticks in the craw when they criticise us for not being good Europeans on this point...

No, I don't think that's true.
I agree with you, and I'm fairly sure I'm not alone in that.

Fair enough. I haven't noticed many others saying so. It's always "we should have placed controls on them" etc.

The sad irony of all of this is that EU immigration which is probably the best for our country, both economically and in terms of integration/cultural factors will go down whereas other migration from other countries which is less economically and/or culturally beneficial will go up.

Unintended consequences and all that.

Still I hope some sensible solution can be found rather than all this tiresome posturing.

Anyway today is the day that the company which installed my solar panels chose to write to me checking that all is OK. And indeed they are - and are working, despite the snow.

Cyclefree said:

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

So does Toys'r'Us.

I rather liked Maplin. The staff were always very helpful. How a toy company can collapse beats me. That would seem to one sector that would be recession proof.

They faced competition from Amazon, and their stores were too large. I went past the Cambridge Toys R Us on Monday (on the way to Maplins...) and it was already closing down and quite depressed.

Mr. Blue, I agree on the SNP's constitutional tomfoolery.

Mr. Eagles, it's a clear historical instance whereby a rapid change to workforce numbers had a direct effect upon the wage situation. Of course, it's easier to not bother engaging with the argument I make and claim I compared migrants to the plague.

Leaving aside your ridiculous, and deliberate, distraction, your daft claim also confuses a rapidly diminishing workforce with a rising one. Unless you think the Black Death increased the population, of course...

It'd be easier to have civil discourse if people could engage with arguments rather than just hurl pejoratives at one another.

SouthamObserver said:

It wasn't just wealthy metropolitans that benefited from EU citizens coming here to pay taxes and do jobs that were not fillable otherwise. Polish plumbers and Bulgarian electricians do work in social and council housing, as well as in Hampstead and Richmond.

I'm not convinced many of them were having extensions or new fitted kitchens. Nor were they employing cleaners...

Pulpstar said:

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

Was that on 2 USB leads ?
The true markup on their products got exposed with the rise and rise of Amazon.

It was the expertise that was worth paying for. Or not, as it seems.

Cyclefree said:

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

So does Toys'r'Us.

I rather liked Maplin. The staff were always very helpful. How a toy company can collapse beats me. That would seem to one sector that would be recession proof.

Toys R Us is a classic victim of the last trend by which retailers (and other companies) loaded themselves up with debt to leverage up the return on shares. It worked well when the business and cash flow were growing strongly but not so much in an environment where real wages are falling for years and the internet bites into your sales. Its surprising it has lasted this long tbh.

I used to buy from the Maplin catalogue before they opened stores everywhere.

And Rapid electronics, who are still going.

And Cirkit. (anyone remember them?)

Tissue_Price said:

SouthamObserver said:

It wasn't just wealthy metropolitans that benefited from EU citizens coming here to pay taxes and do jobs that were not fillable otherwise. Polish plumbers and Bulgarian electricians do work in social and council housing, as well as in Hampstead and Richmond.

I'm not convinced many of them were having extensions or new fitted kitchens. Nor were they employing cleaners...

Extensions tend to be installed by homeowners. Most of them voted Leave.

Did you know that there are drains, pipes and electricity in social and council housing? It's true, there is.

Pulpstar said:

Cyclefree said:

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

So does Toys'r'Us.

I rather liked Maplin. The staff were always very helpful. How a toy company can collapse beats me. That would seem to one sector that would be recession proof.

Amazon.

I've rather gone off them. There is a certain boot sale quality to them these days for anything which isn't books. For anything specialist I prefer to go to specialist retailers.

https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968798796414144512

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

There is also little doubt that the UK is a net beneficiary from EU immigration.

Agreed. As I said in my post. But there are also costs and the costs and benefits have not been equally or fairly shared, a point which is being overlooked.

Since the Brexit vote, a number of countries have suggested that maybe there ought to be changes to the FoM rules. We shall see what happens.

I would this point.

Nonetheless those who benefited from this immigration were reluctant to ensure that they paid the costs and are now wondering why they are being outvoted by those who did not see quite as many benefits from this as they did.

It wasn't just wealthy metropolitans that benefited from EU citizens coming here to pay taxes and do jobs that were not fillable otherwise. Polish plumbers and Bulgarian electricians do work in social and council housing, as well as in Hampstead and Richmond.

Maybe same.

But moron.

Yep, I agree. I am merely querying the assumption that Leave voters actually have not benefited from immigration from the EU. They may feel they haven't, but that is different - though, of course, in politics perception is everything - and who can blame people for resenting immigration when they have been told by the right for many years that it is to blame for many of the problems that this country faces.

It's also worth pointing out that not everyone who voted Remain is an unpatriotic, metropolitan bleeding heart liberal elitist determined to do the country down in order to get a nanny for less than the going rate. Unfortunately, the Brexit process sis not working out as well as it could because the government has decided that Remain voters can be ignored.

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

I've said correcting Morris Dancer's historical inaccuracies is a full time job.

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

Annexed, essentially.

Dan Hodges has just posted a tweet on a times article suggesting Corbyn and Starmer coordinating with Barnier - is this true?

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Blue, I agree on the SNP's constitutional tomfoolery.

Mr. Eagles, it's a clear historical instance whereby a rapid change to workforce numbers had a direct effect upon the wage situation. Of course, it's easier to not bother engaging with the argument I make and claim I compared migrants to the plague.

Leaving aside your ridiculous, and deliberate, distraction, your daft claim also confuses a rapidly diminishing workforce with a rising one. Unless you think the Black Death increased the population, of course...

It'd be easier to have civil discourse if people could engage with arguments rather than just hurl pejoratives at one another.

You made a ridiculous comparison.

Do you really think the circumstances of the 14th century are really comparable to events nearly 700 years later?

I've linked expert analysis with data proving the initial hypothesis was wrong.

Or do you genuinely an event which wiped out around 50% of Europe's population/workforce is comparable to Eastern Europeans moving to the UK?

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

I think that the Staute of Labourers was intended to ensure that wages remained depressed, but I’m not too sure that it did. Wikipedia suggests that wages rose about 100% in the 100 years 1350-1450

Mr. Topping, the plague returned several times. The ensuing decline in the workforce numbers did, as you agree, lead to rising wages. Edward III's attempt to entrench the social hierarchy through preventing peasant mobility and bargaining power via the Statute of Labourers did not work in the long term.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

Yep, I agree. I am merely querying the assumption that Leave voters actually have not benefited from immigration from the EU. They may feel they haven't, but that is different - though, of course, in politics perception is everything - and who can blame people for resenting immigration when they have been told by the right for many years that it is to blame for many of the problems that this country faces.

It's also worth pointing out that not everyone who voted Remain is an unpatriotic, metropolitan bleeding heart liberal elitist determined to do the country down in order to get a nanny for less than the going rate. Unfortunately, the Brexit process sis not working out as well as it could because the government has decided that Remain voters can be ignored.

Agree on 2nd para.

On 1st: yes - but it's not just perception. It's also experience. Some people's experience has not been as positive as you might think. If anything politicians have been far too slow to think about immigration's costs & benefits. For years they insisted that it was only a good thing. Then some of them jumped on a bandwagon and said that it was the cause of everything wrong. Neither are true of course. A bit more nuance from the start; a bit more willingness to engage with those who raised perfectly legitimate questions about the scale and type and consequences of virtually unrestricted immigration from the late 90's onwards would have worked wonders.

I have just finished reading Shipman's book and it still amazes me that the Remain campaign was so unwilling to engage with the immigration argument. It's as if they thought that if they ignored it it would go away. The same might be said of the EU as well.

Look how that has turned out.

And this is not just a British issue. The same issue is being raised in Italy and in Eastern Europe. In France barriers are being put up to migrants from Italy. Even the Germans are raising the issues about the costs (not just economic) of migration.

If only this had been looked at intelligently years ago we might not be in this mess now. Turning a blind eye is rarely a sensible policy.

I've been to Hartlepool to twitch rare birds a few times. (Its location means it gets more than its fair share of migrants....) I remember one occassion when several of us were wandering round the place, with many thousands of pounds worth of binoculars and telescopes strung around necks and over shoulders, when a large group of youths on bikes made a bee-line for us.

"Wot yer doin'?" we were quizzed, in broadest NE accents. We held our nerve, stayed calm, explained how we'd travelled hundreds of miles to see a particular rare bird. But we were still expecting the worst.

"Well, I hope yuz sees it. And a safe journey home..." they cheerfully said, as they cycled off.....

Nice folk in Hartlepool. And it always had the cheapest petrol.

Full document - https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement.pdf

OldKingCole said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

I think that the Staute of Labourers was intended to ensure that wages remained depressed, but I’m not too sure that it did. Wikipedia suggests that wages rose about 100% in the 100 years 1350-1450

Yes. Wages did rise but there was a concerted attempt (with associated sanctions) to depress them. But of course they couldn't keep the lid on the kettle for ever. By the end of the century real wages had risen. Don't forget also that because of the scarcity of labour, plenty of crops rotted in the field and hence inflation ate away at any wage increase.

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

Alex Barker, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, is publishing this on Twitter bit by bit.

Yes but is this the EU position, the UK or an agreed position ?

It's the EU's legal draft based on the agreed position in December.

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

Alex Barker, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, is publishing this on Twitter bit by bit.

Yes but is this the EU position, the UK or an agreed position ?

It's the EU's legal draft based on the agreed position in December.

OK Thanks.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

The UK needs to come up with some solutions. So far, it has failed to do so. The choice is only the EU Way or No Way for as long as the UK government remains paralysed by the fear of upsetting the Brexit Loons.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Blue, I agree on the SNP's constitutional tomfoolery.

Mr. Eagles, it's a clear historical instance whereby a rapid change to workforce numbers had a direct effect upon the wage situation. Of course, it's easier to not bother engaging with the argument I make and claim I compared migrants to the plague.

Leaving aside your ridiculous, and deliberate, distraction, your daft claim also confuses a rapidly diminishing workforce with a rising one. Unless you think the Black Death increased the population, of course...

It'd be easier to have civil discourse if people could engage with arguments rather than just hurl pejoratives at one another.

You made a ridiculous comparison.

Do you really think the circumstances of the 14th century are really comparable to events nearly 700 years later?

I've linked expert analysis with data proving the initial hypothesis was wrong.

Or do you genuinely an event which wiped out around 50% of Europe's population/workforce is comparable to Eastern Europeans moving to the UK?

In terms of changes to the UK labour force, the only situation of similar magnitude between the two events 700 years apart would be WW1.

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/967726413804638208

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

Alex Barker, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, is publishing this on Twitter bit by bit.

Yes but is this the EU position, the UK or an agreed position ?

It's the EU's legal draft based on the agreed position in December.

Here it is.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement.pdf

All 119 pages.

David_Evershed said:

TOPPING said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

So they had to pass a law to stop the natural rise in wages - and you think that's a counter-argument to Mr Dancer?

He said that wages rose. They did not (or at least as much as they might have done). For whatever reason, in this case administrative.

I remember the Prices and Incomes policy in the 1970s. The government passed a law limiting wage increases. Instead we kept getting better fringe benefits in better pensions, company cars, free petrol, more holidays. The alternative was to move jobs to get a salary increase.

Not as much scope for company cars in 1352 but yes I take your point. The baronies were key in seeking wage restraint, but also at times complicit in paying higher wages.

Cyclefree said:

Pulpstar said:

Cyclefree said:

JosiasJessop said:

Maplin collapses.

I guess the £30 I spent in the Cambridge shop on Monday didn't help.

So does Toys'r'Us.

I rather liked Maplin. The staff were always very helpful. How a toy company can collapse beats me. That would seem to one sector that would be recession proof.

Amazon.

I've rather gone off them. There is a certain boot sale quality to them these days for anything which isn't books. For anything specialist I prefer to go to specialist retailers.

I only buy things that are a known brand from Amazon to cut out the likelihood of having rubbish product delivered.

I also prefer to buy from other smaller outlets so that some competition survives.

TheScreamingEagles said:

OldKingCole said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

The UK may well end up being the sick man of Europe. But it is precisely because it hasn't been that that it has been drawing in so many people to come and work here from elsewhere in Europe. It has acted as the employer for the unemployed young of the rest of Europe. And the rest of Europe has been a touch slow to recognise that that imposes costs (as well as benefits) on the UK to which those countries have been unwilling to contribute. The idea that it is only the UK which is guilty of wanting to cherry-pick is for the birds, frankly.

Had FoM resulted in other countries being inundated by Britain's unemployed young I am quite certain that the EU would have made changes to the rules.

A number of countries in the EU receive a large number of people from other EU member states. Those that tend to attract older incomers - such as France and Spain - arguably have to deal with much higher costs than the UK does. We get significant benefits from attracting a largely younger set of incomers, who tend to use public services less and who pay a fair amount of tax. The UK is not a victim here and, of course, has always been able to impose limits on free movement for EU citizens, but has chosen not to.

Most significantly Blair failed to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations

And no UK government has enforced rules that allow the UK to deport EU citizens who are here, but unable to support themselves.

You are (deliberately I think) missing the point. The issue is the severe downward impact of E European migrants on wage rates and employment prospects at the lower end of the labour market and the inequality that generates throughout the labour market. You choose to ignore that, relying instead on a straw man i.e. the bogus claim that migrants come here to rely on state benefits.

Thought there was an official, or otherwise reliable report that said that hadn’t happened.

Yup.

EU migrants have no negative effect on UK wages, says LSE.

Research blames 2008 recession for lower real salaries rather than rise in foreign workers, adding they paid more into UK economy than they took out

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/may/11/eu-migrants-had-no-negative-effect-on-uk-wages-says-lse

There is no control on this study though (As there never can be with this sort of thing) - we've had curiously low wage inflation since a Coventry's worth of immigration arrived every year do you not think ?

Barnesian said:

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

Alex Barker, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, is publishing this on Twitter bit by bit.

Yes but is this the EU position, the UK or an agreed position ?

It's the EU's legal draft based on the agreed position in December.

Here it is.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement.pdf

All 119 pages.

Lets see what Arlene thinks of it all.

Dura_Ace said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just how the voter will see this will be interesting if TM refuses to agree and will not authorise the 50 billion end payment

I don't think either May or the EU give a fuck about the British voters at the moment. They're irrelevant to the EU and May is more concerned with placating the Leaveslamic State wing of the tory party.

But this is a defining moment. If the public perceive the EU's case to be unacceptable no PM will be able to pay over 50 billion euros to the EU

Cyclefree said:

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cyclefree said:

daodao said:

HYUFD said:

daodao said:

A number to.

The people who move from the UK to France and Spain tend to be affluent retirees with moey to spend ie the equivalent of permanent tourists.

That may be so in France, less so in Spain. But they are all big users of public services - and the older they are the more they use them. That is a cost for the host country.

Aren't those healthcare costs recovered from the NHS ?

I don't think there's much doubt that France and Spain are net financial beneficaries from British expats.

The direct healthcare costs are - just as the UK can recover direct healthcare costs from other EU member states.

There is also little doubt that the UK is a net beneficiary from EU immigration.

I would also point out that I am pretty much the only one on here who thinks that letting in Poles and others from Eastern Europe was a good thing, for moral reasons as much as anything else. Britain acted far more in the spirit of Europe than did France and Germany so it rather sticks in the craw when they criticise us for not being good Europeans on this point...

No, I don't think that's true.
I agree with you, and I'm fairly sure I'm not alone in that.

Fair enough. I haven't noticed many others saying so. It's always "we should have placed controls on them" etc.

The sad irony of all of this is that EU immigration which is probably the best for our country, both economically and in terms of integration/cultural factors will go down whereas other migration from other countries which is less economically and/or culturally beneficial will go up.

Unintended consequences and all that.

Still I hope some sensible solution can be found rather than all this tiresome posturing.

Anyway today is the day that the company which installed my solar panels chose to write to me checking that all is OK. And indeed they are - and are working, despite the snow.

People from Australia are "less ..... culturally beneficial" than those from the EU ?

Well, perhaps you have a point.

David_Evershed said:

TOPPING said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

So they had to pass a law to stop the natural rise in wages - and you think that's a counter-argument to Mr Dancer?

He said that wages rose. They did not (or at least as much as they might have done). For whatever reason, in this case administrative.

I remember the Prices and Incomes policy in the 1970s. The government passed a law limiting wage increases. Instead we kept getting better fringe benefits in better pensions, company cars, free petrol, more holidays. The alternative was to move jobs to get a salary increase.

As result of one or other of the wage freezes in the NHS I ended up with nearly 7 weeks holiday a year. Plus, of course, public holidays, and, because we’d been given Time Off in Lieu instead of overtime, around a day a fortnight TOIL. Got difficult take to them all.

John_M said:

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

Barnesian said:

Pulpstar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

Oh right this it the EU publishing this ?

Alex Barker, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, is publishing this on Twitter bit by bit.

Yes but is this the EU position, the UK or an agreed position ?

It's the EU's legal draft based on the agreed position in December.

Here it is.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement.pdf

All 119 pages.

Lets see what Arlene thinks of it all.

She'll need someone to explain all the big words.

Which part of No do you not understand?

OldKingCole said:

David_Evershed said:

TOPPING said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

So they had to pass a law to stop the natural rise in wages - and you think that's a counter-argument to Mr Dancer?

He said that wages rose. They did not (or at least as much as they might have done). For whatever reason, in this case administrative.

I remember the Prices and Incomes policy in the 1970s. The government passed a law limiting wage increases. Instead we kept getting better fringe benefits in better pensions, company cars, free petrol, more holidays. The alternative was to move jobs to get a salary increase.

As result of one or other of the wage freezes in the NHS I ended up with nearly 7 weeks holiday a year. Plus, of course, public holidays, and, because we’d been given Time Off in Lieu instead of overtime, around a day a fortnight TOIL. Got difficult take them all.

My wife is a nurse and she currently gets 10 weeks paid holiday. She finds it very difficult to take it and often does bank shifts during her holiday

MarqueeMark said:

David_Evershed said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

williamglenn said:

The text has been published.
https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/968801984995385348

BBC reporting No 10 will not sign off on this and in the end the EU is not going to get it's 50 billion

The BBC thinks either the UK accepts the EU position or there is no deal. In fact it's a negotiation between the two sides.

This is the biggest negotiation of our lifetime. The level of incomprehension of the process of negotiating is breath-taking. Especially the number of media pundits who think they have a right to know every element of the discussions, every step of the way.

Maybe they could be diverted to a day out at an abbatoir and a sausage factory instead. To see every step of the process there.

It's astonishing. It doesn't help that the government is in a weak Parliamentary position as there is then an inevitable desire to see it through a failing lens. And the Article 50 process undoubtedly gives the EU a structural advantage in the negotiation. But [most] UK journalists seem far too comfortable reporting only on the evolution of our position.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Why does the world hate 4x4 drivers?

I'm in yet another persecuted minority.

twitter.com/Sathnam/status/968769497900437504

Envy.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Why does the world hate 4x4 drivers?

I'm in yet another persecuted minority.

https://twitter.com/Sathnam/status/968769497900437504

I thought the point of these tractors in Chelsea is that they don't hit lampposts in the snow.

(Plus the ability to take speed bumps at illegal speeds).

currystar said:

OldKingCole said:

David_Evershed said:

TOPPING said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I find it hard to believe that supply of labour doesn't have *any* impact on wages. After the Black Death, wages for those at the lower end of society rose as there were too many fields and not enough workers to tend to them. Supply of labour fell sharply, wages rose quickly.

Well done on comparing immigrants to an actual plague.

Are you related to Max Mosley ?

He's wrong anyway because after the Black Death the Statute of Labourers in the UK ensured (with admittedly varied effect) that wages remained subdued, certainly below their market clearing level. Although real wages did rise a few decades later.

So they had to pass a law to stop the natural rise in wages - and you think that's a counter-argument to Mr Dancer?

He said that wages rose. They did not (or at least as much as they might have done). For whatever reason, in this case administrative.

I remember the Prices and Incomes policy in the 1970s. The government passed a law limiting wage increases. Instead we kept getting better fringe benefits in better pensions, company cars, free petrol, more holidays. The alternative was to move jobs to get a salary increase.

As result of one or other of the wage freezes in the NHS I ended up with nearly 7 weeks holiday a year. Plus, of course, public holidays, and, because we’d been given Time Off in Lieu instead of overtime, around a day a fortnight TOIL. Got difficult take them all.

My wife is a nurse and she currently gets 10 weeks paid holiday. She finds it very difficult to take it and often does bank shifts during her holiday

10 weeks!!!! I was cheated!

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Dura_Ace said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just how the voter will see this will be interesting if TM refuses to agree and will not authorise the 50 billion end payment

I don't think either May or the EU give a fuck about the British voters at the moment. They're irrelevant to the EU and May is more concerned with placating the Leaveslamic State wing of the tory party.

But this is a defining moment. If the public perceive the EU's case to be unacceptable no PM will be able to pay over 50 billion euros to the EU

"Leaveslamic State"
Sigh. A new low I think.