politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With 60 days to go the uncertainty is greater than ever

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Good morning

This morning Johnson has decided that the deal is fine if the backstop is negotiated away.

Graham Brady on Sky has just said a codicil to the agreement on the backstop would be acceptable, which does away with opening the WDA

TM is reported as telling her cabinet she will not allow a no deal and I do not find it at all surprising she would give private assurances to cabinet ministers for something she will not allow, but at this time in the negotiations it would be an abject surrender of her negotiating position with the EU and the remain lobby

Of course, Bercow may not call Sir Graham Brady's amendment but doing so would see turmoil on the conservative benches at the perceived injustice and would probably make Bercow's position untenable

Interesting times - maybe keep cool and carry on is best at present

I don't see how the government could whip for Sir Graham Brady's amendment either in theory or in practice. How can you sanction an MP who voted for the deal and who voted against an amendment that sabotages the deal that the government negotiated?

Would be fun to see Hammond and Rudd voting for Sir Graham's amendment if it's government whipped...

You rather illustrate the point. How could Theresa May sack either when they are voting to implement the actions of the executive?

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

Which is why all the talk of food shortages is dangerous.

People are free to pick up an extra can of soup or beans if they wish, but politicians and journalists need to think very carefully before going on in public about these things.

As someone (sorry can't remember who) mentioned on the here the other day, we now live in an age of social media, and widespread panic could be a problem even if there are no actual shortages.

Sorry to be a bore, but the problem is that you simply don't know how bad the "actual shortages" will be.

If we knew there wouldn't be any "actual shortages", it would indeed be best to keep quiet about the subject.

If we knew there would be serious "actual shortages" then it would be irresponsible _not_ to encourage people to build up their own stocks of food and essentials.

It's a bit of an Alice in Wonderland world where we are collectively taking a leap in the dark and exposing our population to an unknown risk, and the criticism is directed at the people talking about the risk rather than the people causing the risk!

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Good morning

This morning Johnson has decided that the deal is fine if the backstop is negotiated away.

Graham Brady on Sky has just said a codicil to the agreement on the backstop would be acceptable, which does away with opening the WDA

TM is reported as telling her cabinet she will not allow a no deal and I do not find it at all surprising she would give private assurances to cabinet ministers for something she will not allow, but at this time in the negotiations it would be an abject surrender of her negotiating position with the EU and the remain lobby

Of course, Bercow may not call Sir Graham Brady's amendment but doing so would see turmoil on the conservative benches at the perceived injustice and would probably make Bercow's position untenable

Interesting times - maybe keep cool and carry on is best at present

I don't see how the government could whip for Sir Graham Brady's amendment either in theory or in practice. How can you sanction an MP who voted for the deal and who voted against an amendment that sabotages the deal that the government negotiated?

I agree Alastair - it would be strange but this whole process is ripping up the rule book

Congrats, Mr. Royale

If the government accepts a proposed amendment, does it still need to be voted on individually, or does it simply form part of the Bill that's voted on at the end of the process?

My understanding was the former latter, any Erskine May fans around?

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Congratulations. Of course you're happy, and so you should be. Best wishes to all three of you.

Mr. kinabalu, does Japan have to put its armed forces into the EU Army? Does it have to be subject to EU legislation for entirely domestic matters?

Democratic consent of the people and the capacity for a nation to govern itself are not small things of no consequence.

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

I'm not sure people are going to be buying panic buying frozen peas when they don't have room in their freezers....because it's full of fish fingers.

And why bother filling up your house with all manner of stuff, when someone else will be doing it for you - then having it (admitedly, at a mark-up) at every car-boot in the land?

I haven't panic bought a single extra thing, because I think it's bollocks.

No Deal will certainly cause economic and financial challenges but shortages of raw foodstuffs and medicine isn't one of them. It's possible that niche fresh European products, like mozzarella, spike in price which im sure will keep Twitter in righteous fury for weeks.

I always find that people don’t appreciate the value of switching. If the cost of potatoes goes up we will likely eat more rice. I for one don’t need to stockpile. We have so much food in our cupboards and freezer we could live for weeks without noticing. I get it from my mum who could live for months from the stuff she has!

Coming to pb soon: snoek and camp coffee.

kinabalu said:

So, a big beautiful trade deal between the EU and Japan has been finalized. Took 5 years and everyone's a winner.

Just think, once we have got our independence back - very soon now god willing - we will be able to get in on the act and negotiate a trade deal with both Japan AND the EU.

Proper sovereign stuff! I for one can barely wait.

It's fine. We still get default access to MyFirstTradeDeal (or whatever it's called) and Liam's negotiation with Ghana, according to The Express, is soon to bear fruit.

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Congratulations to you both! Sorry to report that I've found my girls more trouble than the boy...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Good morning

This morning Johnson has decided that the deal is fine if the backstop is negotiated away.

Graham Brady on Sky has just said a codicil to the agreement on the backstop would be acceptable, which does away with opening the WDA

TM is reported as telling her cabinet she will not allow a no deal and I do not find it at all surprising she would give private assurances to cabinet ministers for something she will not allow, but at this time in the negotiations it would be an abject surrender of her negotiating position with the EU and the remain lobby

Of course, Bercow may not call Sir Graham Brady's amendment but doing so would see turmoil on the conservative benches at the perceived injustice and would probably make Bercow's position untenable

Interesting times - maybe keep cool and carry on is best at present

Oh Big_G, I'm afraid you've given away the negotiating position now. The EU might be reading PB.

Tissue_Price said:

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Congratulations to you both! Sorry to report that I've found my girls more trouble than the boy...

Take it they've got to, or possibly past, their teenage years.

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

Which is why all the talk of food shortages is dangerous.

People are free to pick up an extra can of soup or beans if they wish, but politicians and journalists need to think very carefully before going on in public about these things.

As someone (sorry can't remember who) mentioned on the here the other day, we now live in an age of social media, and widespread panic could be a problem even if there are no actual shortages.

Sorry to be a bore, but the problem is that you simply don't know how bad the "actual shortages" will be.

If we knew there wouldn't be any "actual shortages", it would indeed be best to keep quiet about the subject.

If we knew there would be serious "actual shortages" then it would be irresponsible _not_ to encourage people to build up their own stocks of food and essentials.

It's a bit of an Alice in Wonderland world where we are collectively taking a leap in the dark and exposing our population to an unknown risk, and the criticism is directed at the people talking about the risk rather than the people causing the risk!

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis is for that belief. I just don't see much point in repeated assertions about these things, unless they're accompanied by some kind of reasoning or evidence to back them up.

To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

congrats

just dont call her theresa

Congratulations to the Royale family.

I read that Denmark is planning to build a wall with Germany to stop wild boar rampaging across the border bringing disease etc.

Are they planning to make Germany pay for the wall?

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Congratulations.

I sense that those ridiculing the possible economic turmoil from a No Deal are simultaneously desparately hoping it does not get put to the test.

However don't despair if it does happen i spotted yet another in the ever expanding Leaver Book of Excuses earlier on - if the food shelves are empty it won't be because there is actually a shortage of food will only be because stupid people panicked and stockpiled because of "Project Fear"!

If the leavers had spent as much time and ingenuity on coming up with a Brexit that works as they have on the excuses for why it isn't we might be a little further ahead.

Roger said:

Sandpit said:

FPT

AndyJS said:

"Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.

My flat in Soho was twenty yards from the original Patisserie Valerie on Old Compton Street It had eight to ten seater tables with a large bowl of croissants in the centre. You shared tables and helped yourself to the croissants while the long serving Spanish waitress brought your coffee at her own pace..

It was always full of film people and it was much the best and most famous coffee bar in town. It was the place for early morning meetings and a place to read your paper, It sold pastries at the front of the shop but the tables were coffee and croissants only. It later opened an upstairs doing English breakfasts but it was the dark wood lined interior with a wall sized Lautrec that made it the first port of call even for out of towners.

I can only imagine one of my fellow early morning croissant eaters saw the potential in the brand and decided to run with it. If it's true that he's a Brexiteer it's ironic. It was the most cosmopolitan cafe in the most cosmopolitan district in London. Perhaps going bust is Soho's revenge?

I remember going to the original cafe in those days. Perhaps we unknowingly shared a table one morning, eh Roger?

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

Which is why all the talk of food shortages is dangerous.

People are free to pick up an extra can of soup or beans if they wish, but politicians and journalists need to think very carefully before going on in public about these things.

As someone (sorry can't remember who) mentioned on the here the other day, we now live in an age of social media, and widespread panic could be a problem even if there are no actual shortages.

Sorry to be a bore, but the problem is that you simply don't know how bad the "actual shortages" will be.

If we knew there wouldn't be any "actual shortages", it would indeed be best to keep quiet about the subject.

If we knew there would be serious "actual shortages" then it would be irresponsible _not_ to encourage people to build up their own stocks of food and essentials.

It's a bit of an Alice in Wonderland world where we are collectively taking a leap in the dark and exposing our population to an unknown risk, and the criticism is directed at the people talking about the risk rather than the people causing the risk!

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

The smart supermarkets with all their big data analysis will have enough supplies in for panic buying. They will then ensure that the day before Brexit day they have the warehouses full and the store rooms in their supermarkets full. Brexit day plus one then all the supermarkets will have full supplies and the newspapers will all be "What was the Fuss about?"

6 months down the road may be a slightly different story.

Many thanks to you all for your kind words.

Her name is Elizabeth, one of the few we both loved and as ardent monarchists and huge fans of HMQ we could think of no better and it suits her perfectly.

And I see your true colors
Shining through
I see your true colors
And that's why I love hate you...
https://twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/1089622973168922626

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Which is why all the talk of food shortages is dangerous.

People are free to pick up an extra can of soup or beans if they wish, but politicians and journalists need to think very carefully before going on in public about these things.

As someone (sorry can't remember who) mentioned on the here the other day, we now live in an age of social media, and widespread panic could be a problem even if there are no actual shortages.

Sorry to be a bore, but the problem is that you simply don't know how bad the "actual shortages" will be.

If we knew there wouldn't be any "actual shortages", it would indeed be best to keep quiet about the subject.

If we knew there would be serious "actual shortages" then it would be irresponsible _not_ to encourage people to build up their own stocks of food and essentials.

It's a bit of an Alice in Wonderland world where we are collectively taking a leap in the dark and exposing our population to an unknown risk, and the criticism is directed at the people talking about the risk rather than the people causing the risk!

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normc and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

and some of that 30% from the EU will just switch to RoW if the EU doesnt want to sell it.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kinabalu, does Japan have to put its armed forces into the EU Army? Does it have to be subject to EU legislation for entirely domestic matters?

Democratic consent of the people and the capacity for a nation to govern itself are not small things of no consequence.

Japan does not, and 'democracy' (the what and the why and the how) is indeed an important thing.

On trade deals, as in many aspects of life, there is a value in fending for oneself rather than relying on others. OK, so it might take many years of effort and focus to end up with a set of trade deals that are not as good as those we had to start with but we will have done them ourselves.

As analogy, how much more satisfying to ego and soul to put in decades of hard graft to buy a flat in Croydon, rather than get given a semi in Dulwich by your parents for your 25th.

Casino_Royale said:

Many thanks to you all for your kind words.

Her name is Elizabeth, one of the few we both loved and as ardent monarchists and huge fans of HMQ we could think of no better and it suits her perfectly.

politicalbetty.com

Congratulations.

OldKingCole said:

Tissue_Price said:

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Congratulations to you both! Sorry to report that I've found my girls more trouble than the boy...

Take it they've got to, or possibly past, their teenage years.

Nope, the boy's 8 and the girls are 5 & 2... it's more a middle-child thing, to be honest! And of course they're no trouble at all really - it's all relative.

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

I'm not sure people are going to be buying panic buying frozen peas when they don't have room in their freezers....because it's full of fish fingers.

And why bother filling up your house with all manner of stuff, when someone else will be doing it for you - then having it (admitedly, at a mark-up) at every car-boot in the land?

I haven't panic bought a single extra thing, because I think it's bollocks.

No Deal will certainly cause economic and financial challenges but shortages of raw foodstuffs and medicine isn't one of them. It's possible that niche fresh European products, like mozzarella, spike in price which im sure will keep Twitter in righteous fury for weeks.

Why are you confident that there won't be shortages of raw foodstuffs? I would have thought that it was virtually certain that there will be, if there is extensive disruption to the Calais/Dover route caused by crashing out with no deal. For example, we import around 400,000 metric tonnes of tomatoes (UK production is only a fifth of that, and of course is concentrated in t he summer months). It's products like that - with limited shelf life, which can't be stockpiled, and which are bulky and imported in very large quantities from the EU - which are the most likely to be hit.

PS: Congratulations on the birth of Elizabeth, BTW!

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

That is lovely news. Congratulations to you and your wife and welcome to baby Elizabeth.

AlastairMeeks said:

Casino_Royale said:

Many thanks to you all for your kind words.

Her name is Elizabeth, one of the few we both loved and as ardent monarchists and huge fans of HMQ we could think of no better and it suits her perfectly.

politicalbetty.com

Congratulations.

Many thanks, Alastair.

Casino_Royale said:

Many thanks to you all for your kind words.

Her name is Elizabeth, one of the few we both loved and as ardent monarchists and huge fans of HMQ we could think of no better and it suits her perfectly.

Congrats to you all.

EDIT old news.

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Huge congrats to you both! Welcome to the world to Elizabeh R!

Casino_Royale said:

Off topic, some pb'ers may like to know my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl. 7lb 15Oz.

Amazing how everything pales into insignificance next to that. We are very happy.

Call it Europa.

Anorak said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis is for that belief. I just don't see much point in repeated assertions about these things, unless they're accompanied by some kind of reasoning or evidence to back them up.

To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.

Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.

widespread malnutrition

were one of the fattest nations anywhere, HMG WANTS us to eat less.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/cut-down-on-your-calories/

Alanbrooke said:

Anorak said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis is for that belief. I just don't see much point in repeated assertions about these things, unless they're accompanied by some kind of reasoning or evidence to back them up.

To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.

Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.

widespread malnutrition

were one of the fattest nations anywhere, HMG WANTS us to eat less.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/cut-down-on-your-calories/

I'm going to assume that's tongue in cheek, as selling food shortages as an advantage of Brexit would be, well, batshit insane.

Stark_Dawning said:

It's fine. We still get default access to MyFirstTradeDeal (or whatever it's called) and Liam's negotiation with Ghana, according to The Express, is soon to bear fruit.

Ghana, yes indeed, and that one can presumably be rolled out very quickly across the rest of the commonwealth. That's 53 nations - 53! - that due to a strong common bond forged out of a love of cricket and affection for Blighty and the Queen will soon become a formidable new trading bloc centred around all things British.

There are only 27 nations in the EU single market. Literally half the size.

#britishcentury

AlastairMeeks said:

It looks like another gambit is failing:

https://twitter.com/CharlieCooper8/status/1089841446872670209

They'll end up with something that is less to their liking.

I've just bought an R35 GTR with two blown turbos if anyone wants to congratulate me.

Alanbrooke said:

Anorak said:

Alanbrooke said:

Anorak said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis is for that belief. I just don't see much point in repeated assertions about these things, unless they're accompanied by some kind of reasoning or evidence to back them up.

To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.

Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.

widespread malnutrition

were one of the fattest nations anywhere, HMG WANTS us to eat less.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/cut-down-on-your-calories/

I'm going to assume that's tongue in cheek, as selling food shortages as an advantage of Brexit would be, well, batshit insane.

no its simply pointing out that lack of calories will not be a problem.

If you're fat. Think or poor Mr Dancer, with the physique of a racing snake. He'll be found slumped over his trebuchet, half eaten by the neighbourhood cats.

Anorak said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis is for that belief. I just don't see much point in repeated assertions about these things, unless they're accompanied by some kind of reasoning or evidence to back them up.

To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.

Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.

If everyone ate 80% of what they do now, we'd be a fitter and healthier nation, not starving and rioting.

The problems will come from people panicking rather than trusting the supply chains to sort themselves out.

Of course if half the EU food arrived, then we'd be on 95% even before the supermarkets go shopping in the rest of the world.

There's plenty of risks associated with Brexit, but food shortages really isn't one of them. Maybe it might seem like the end of the world for Tarquin in Hoxton that he can't get avocados for a week or two, but it really isn't.

Dura_Ace said:

I've just bought an R35 GTR with two blown turbos if anyone wants to congratulate me.

Two blown turbos, as opposed to two turbo blowers?

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It looks like another gambit is failing:

https://twitter.com/CharlieCooper8/status/1089841446872670209

They'll end up with something that is less to their liking.

Indeed - Maybe they are deliberating wanting it to fail

Seems Norway or even remain are now looking much more likely. For me if that is the choice we just remain, but how we get there I do not know

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

Anorak said:

Alanbrooke said:

Anorak said:

Sandpit said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

The most likely scenario is that if people continue to shop normally there won't be shortages, but if people start panic buying then the shelves could empty very quickly - so the advise needs to be to continue shopping normally rather than to panic and start hoarding.

Of course, if there's a genuine risk of widespread food shortages then that's a different scenario that IMO is unlikely - but governments and supermarkets need to be able to plan without the fact of their planning being used to cause further panic.

Yes, I understand that you don't think there will be any "real" shortages, and I understand that other people think the same.

What I don't understand is what the basis isbit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.

Okay, numbers.

ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is producof UK food consumption is exported.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply

So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.

That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.

If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.

Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.

widespread malnutrition

were one of the fattest nations anywhere, HMG WANTS us to eat less.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/cut-down-on-your-calories/

I'm going to assume that's tongue in cheek, as selling food shortages as an advantage of Brexit would be, well, batshit insane.

no its simply pointing out that lack of calories will not be a problem.

Not for Leavers - they're disproportionately likely to be obese.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/06/30/the-weight-of-brexit-leave-vote-is-higher-in-areas-of-higher-obesity/

its why I voted out, Leave is my 2019 diet plan

mind you in that photo you posted the other day your suit was looking a bit tight

could be some up side for you too

My other half has been stockpiling chocolate. He's worried that trade deal with Ghana might not come through.

On Pat Val, some thoughts:-

1. There will be much more to come out. The story so far doesn’t quite make sense to me. Made up refurbishment invoices suggests someone was creaming off money or possible money laundering style activities. That is not the sort of stuff you do to make something look more profitable than it is but it may be if you’re trying to hide unprofitability. But if so, how often can you do it? Stores don’t get refurbished every week.

2. You cannot manage by looking at one or two sources of information - your accounts or spreadsheets. You need to visit shops and compare with your rivals and with what is happening in the market and the economy generally. You need to sense check and look at what is often hiding in plain sight in front of you. This is something that people at the top of organisations, often very clever people are often very bad at doing. Asking basic, obvious questions is rarer than it should be.

3. If things are going well, that is what you planned for and expected, it is very easy to see only what confirms what you want to be true and ignore the rest. Lots of people had an interest in Valerie doing welll and congratulating themselves for being part of a seeming success story. That can make it very difficult for people to admit to problems or for potential whistleblowers to speak up. Or for others to respond to concerns eg the questions HMRC raised about forged documents.

4. Auditors are not investigators. They check things. They don’t ask questions or look for oddities. Companies often assume auditors are the same as investigators and can do the same job. They aren’t and can’t.

5. The human element - what went wrong was down to individuals. At the heart of this story will be people who did the wrong thing and others who failed to do the right thing and others who did not understand or manage effectively the people they hired and employed so that a number of people ending up behaving badly and others stood by and let them get away with it.

Well anyone who followed me into £/$ when I recommended it over the holiday period should be sitting very happily right now with a very blue position.

I'm taking a bit of profit as tomorrow could lead to some volatility, but I still reckon that in any scenario other than no deal, £/$ at 1.316 still offers considerable upside.

Sandpit said:

Dura_Ace said:

I've just bought an R35 GTR with two blown turbos if anyone wants to congratulate me.

Two blown turbos, as opposed to two turbo blowers?

Both completely fucked - more shaft play than Kevin Spacey on Clapham Common. I'm going to put HKS GT800s in it.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Borough, it's rather unpleasant political rhetoric. I imagine we'll see rather more of it.

Sadly, true.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Chris said:

Anything could be a problem if there is panic buying.

I'm not sure people are going to be buying panic buying frozen peas when they don't have room in their freezers....because it's full of fish fingers.

And why bother filling up your house with all manner of stuff, when someone else will be doing it for you - then having it (admitedly, at a mark-up) at every car-boot in the land?

I haven't panic bought a single extra thing, because I think it's bollocks.

No Deal will certainly cause economic and financial challenges but shortages of raw foodstuffs and medicine isn't one of them. It's possible that niche fresh European products, like mozzarella, spike in price which im sure will keep Twitter in righteous fury for weeks.

Why are you confident that there won't be shortages of raw foodstuffs? I would have thought that it was virtually certain that there will be, if there is extensive disruption to the Calais/Dover route caused by crashing out with no deal. For example, we import around 400,000 metric tonnes of tomatoes (UK production is only a fifth of that, and of course is concentrated in t he summer months). It's products like that - with limited shelf life, which can't be stockpiled, and which are bulky and imported in very large quantities from the EU - which are the most likely to be hit.

PS: Congratulations on the birth of Elizabeth, BTW!

Similarly, onions - a significant proportion of which come from Holland, I understand.