politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s big speech – David Herdson’s take
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s big speech – David Herdson’s take
2/n There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:– Free university tuition– Renationalisation of key industries– "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
Comments
-
First? Hmm - been a while.
Both parties now actively electioneering. Both leaders actively avoiding the scrutiny of an interview, and appealing to their populist base. What a shitfest we are in for.
PS If Malc is around, I got the Woodford Reserve and am enjoying it very much. Very good value, if not as good a proper single malt!0 -
Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.0 -
FPT:algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
Unfortunately only saw highlights of the "big speech".
RE: Herdson's point 5-
Corbyn stated he wanted a second referendum (for the first time?) with two plausible options, one of which would be remain.0 -
Jeremy Corbyn doesn't need to build a consensus. He needs only to gather more people in his tent than Boris Johnson gets in his. He reckons he can do this by preaching to the choir. He might well be right.0
-
Corbyn had to shore up his base if there is an election, because right now he cannot rely on it. The big lesson of Brecon and Radnor is that non-tactical, utterly tribal Labour LEAVE voters are deserting the party for the Liberal Democrats. That's an existential threat if not addressed. So expect lots of red meat for the ex-industrial areas and the tribal loyalists.
It sounds as though he basically repeated the 2017 manifesto on a sort of 'what the hell - it worked last time' basis. But his sums didn't even begin to make sense then and make less sense now. For example, how is he going to put more money into lifelong learning and technical education as pledged a fortnight ago if the whole education budget is swamped by free university tuition?0 -
So, logically are you saying that as you are ok with people beating up Jones then you should expect something even worse happening to you?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Is that right?2 -
*Rummages around for a cricket bat*kamski said:
So, logically are you saying that as you are ok with people beating up Jones then you should expect something even worse happening to you?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Is that right?0 -
Your house must be seriously untidy if you have to rummage for something as big as a cricket bat.Anorak said:
*Rummages around for a cricket bat*kamski said:
So, logically are you saying that as you are ok with people beating up Jones then you should expect something even worse happening to you?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Is that right?
Mine's easy to see. It's on top of all those papers I keep not getting round to filing.1 -
OK, but what is a reasonable escalation from the base of tossing a milkshake?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Surely not a violent (!) mugging.
Something like letting his bike tyres down would have been more appropriate.0 -
Mentioned in the previous thread but worth repeating
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1163395649909514240
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed.
Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.0 -
OK - since we’ve already gone off topic, am reposting this FPT.
On my list of British people who have done some of the most harm in the last 20 years will be one (ex) Dr Andrew Wakefield.
In a sane world he would be shunned and having to pick up litter with his bare hands to earn a living not being feted and fawned over by super-models and credulous and/or worried parents.1 -
On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.0 -
Why? Does he worry much about deflation?kinabalu said:
OK, but what is a reasonable escalation from the base of tossing a milkshake?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Surely not a violent (!) mugging.
Something like letting his bike tyres down would have been more appropriate.0 -
It was hidden underneath the nail-studded baseball bats and blood-stained machetes. I need to get more organised.ydoethur said:
Your house must be seriously untidy if you have to rummage for something as big as a cricket bat.Anorak said:
*Rummages around for a cricket bat*kamski said:
So, logically are you saying that as you are ok with people beating up Jones then you should expect something even worse happening to you?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Is that right?
Mine's easy to see. It's on top of all those papers I keep not getting round to filing.1 -
A milkshake for a milkshake and the whole world needs to head to the dry cleaners.kinabalu said:
OK, but what is a reasonable escalation from the base of tossing a milkshake?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Surely not a violent (!) mugging.
Something like letting his bike tyres down would have been more appropriate.1 -
It is not a logical impossibility as Johnson promised during the referendum campaign that "we will remain a paid up, valued, participating member of the Single Marketalgarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson_MP/status/1155808844024602624?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1155808844024602624&ref_url=https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/07/30/this-clip-of-boris-johnson-talking-about-the-single-market-hasnt-aged-well/
0 -
I don't support "milkshaking" or any form of violence.nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
But two wrongs don't make a right. The people that attacked him - irresepective of the reasons for the attack - need to be caught and punished.0 -
On topic, this promise
“Can they explain, simply, what "[We'll] give the workforce a 10% stake in large companies; paying a dividend of as much as £500 a year to each employee" means in practice?”
has been analysed before. Wasn’t the conclusion that in fact the government would be taking the majority of the stake for itself because the 10% share would not be owned by the employees individually and they would only be getting a proportion of the dividends. In short a proposal dressed up as giving something to employees is in fact a proposal which will take from them and the companies they work for.0 -
Not to mention trashing the value of their pensions.Cyclefree said:On topic, this promise
“Can they explain, simply, what "[We'll] give the workforce a 10% stake in large companies; paying a dividend of as much as £500 a year to each employee" means in practice?”
has been analysed before. Wasn’t the conclusion that in fact the government would be taking the majority of the stake for itself because the 10% share would not be owned by the employees individually and they would only be getting a proportion of the dividends. In short a proposal dressed up as giving something to employees is in fact a proposal which will take steal from them and the companies they work for.0 -
Was it only yesterday I saw a Labour party spokesman saying that tory spending plans were threatening to wreck the public finances?ydoethur said:Corbyn had to shore up his base if there is an election, because right now he cannot rely on it. The big lesson of Brecon and Radnor is that non-tactical, utterly tribal Labour LEAVE voters are deserting the party for the Liberal Democrats. That's an existential threat if not addressed. So expect lots of red meat for the ex-industrial areas and the tribal loyalists.
It sounds as though he basically repeated the 2017 manifesto on a sort of 'what the hell - it worked last time' basis. But his sums didn't even begin to make sense then and make less sense now. For example, how is he going to put more money into lifelong learning and technical education as pledged a fortnight ago if the whole education budget is swamped by free university tuition?
Irony meter broke there and then.
0 -
Shouldn't come as a surprise. How else are they going to be funding their Big Shiny Spending Plans?Cyclefree said:On topic, this promise
“Can they explain, simply, what "[We'll] give the workforce a 10% stake in large companies; paying a dividend of as much as £500 a year to each employee" means in practice?”
has been analysed before. Wasn’t the conclusion that in fact the government would be taking the majority of the stake for itself because the 10% share would not be owned by the employees individually and they would only be getting a proportion of the dividends. In short a proposal dressed up as giving something to employees is in fact a proposal which will take steal from them and the companies they work for.0 -
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.1 -
Or does he regard a year at the end of which prices are lower than they were at the beginning as, on the whole, a Goodyear?ydoethur said:
Why? Does he worry much about deflation?kinabalu said:
OK, but what is a reasonable escalation from the base of tossing a milkshake?nunuone said:Owen Jones is crying about being attacked.
I have little sympathy for him. Ince he decided it was o.k to throw milkshakes at people he didn't like he should of expected worse coming back to him from the other side.
Too bad, so sad.
Surely not a violent (!) mugging.
Something like letting his bike tyres down would have been more appropriate.1 -
Absolutely agree, but the sensationalism of some of the media to the obviously very dodgy study by Wakefield was reprehensible. The combination of the two has meant children have died of measles in the UK.Cyclefree said:OK - since we’ve already gone off topic, am reposting this FPT.
On my list of British people who have done some of the most harm in the last 20 years will be one (ex) Dr Andrew Wakefield.
In a sane world he would be shunned and having to pick up litter with his bare hands to earn a living not being feted and fawned over by super-models and credulous and/or worried parents.
0 -
Mortgage rates can go negative-rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-stunned-as-negative-rates-sweep-across-danish-mortgages0 -
At least have the common decency to put "Brexit dividend" in quote marks.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the Brexit dividend.0 -
Didn't the Daily Mail give him a lot of support and publicity?Cyclefree said:OK - since we’ve already gone off topic, am reposting this FPT.
On my list of British people who have done some of the most harm in the last 20 years will be one (ex) Dr Andrew Wakefield.
In a sane world he would be shunned and having to pick up litter with his bare hands to earn a living not being feted and fawned over by super-models and credulous and/or worried parents.
Has it ever apologised?0 -
I haven't read the article but my understanding is that's not what the consumer paid. That's what investors paid for Danish mortgage bondJBriskinindyref2 said:
Mortgage rates can go negative-rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-stunned-as-negative-rates-sweep-across-danish-mortgages0 -
FPT:
Yes ... but. There is also a reason by human insulin is still available, apart from cost. Reactions can be unpredictable, which is why porcine insulin is still available too.Charles said:
I’d also point out that OTC insulin is * a different product *MattW said:
Worth noting that all insulins are not equivalent, as we see in this cautionary tale:
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1158807466383159296?s=19
He was prescribed insulin analogue - synthetic - and chose to take something else.
There’s a reason why most insulin is synthetic.
The original piece linked stated that he changed at the suggestion of a Doctor:
"He began rationing his pricey prescription, before a doctor recommended taking ReliOn, an over-the-counter brand sold for $25 a vial at Walmart."
Very much agree with the comments on diabetes costs in USA. Syringes seem very expensive. too.
Dr Fox is right on the costs.
The insulin cost in the US is a number of times that paid by the Local Doctor here, based on the BNF numbers for the same product. Very rough estimate based on the last time I looked it up would be 5x plus more expensive in USA. Even the cheaper one is getting on for 2-3 times. Syringes are not dissimilar - I could buy them of Amazon at about a fifth of the price quoted (15p vs 1 dollar), should I not use a prescription.
I am just about to start picking up the tab for daily part time professional care for a parent, and it is a similar type of number.
0 -
I think they're negative but there's still bank fees to be paid - There was a bit on World Service last night about it as well.rcs1000 said:
I haven't read the article but my understanding is that's not what the consumer paid. That's what investors paid for Danish mortgage bondJBriskinindyref2 said:
Mortgage rates can go negative-rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-stunned-as-negative-rates-sweep-across-danish-mortgages0 -
Indeed. That was the auction price for the bonds.rcs1000 said:
I haven't read the article but my understanding is that's not what the consumer paid. That's what investors paid for Danish mortgage bondJBriskinindyref2 said:
Mortgage rates can go negative-rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-stunned-as-negative-rates-sweep-across-danish-mortgages0 -
Done.Anorak said:
At least have the common decency to put "Brexit dividend" in quote marks.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the Brexit dividend.0 -
File under only possible in the event of a Labour landslide.Cyclefree said:On topic, this promise
“Can they explain, simply, what "[We'll] give the workforce a 10% stake in large companies; paying a dividend of as much as £500 a year to each employee" means in practice?”
has been analysed before. Wasn’t the conclusion that in fact the government would be taking the majority of the stake for itself because the 10% share would not be owned by the employees individually and they would only be getting a proportion of the dividends. In short a proposal dressed up as giving something to employees is in fact a proposal which will take from them and the companies they work for.
I doubt it's even all that popular, it's not clear what it means really.0 -
Why would they bother funding them?MarqueeMark said:
Shouldn't come as a surprise. How else are they going to be funding their Big Shiny Spending Plans?Cyclefree said:On topic, this promise
“Can they explain, simply, what "[We'll] give the workforce a 10% stake in large companies; paying a dividend of as much as £500 a year to each employee" means in practice?”
has been analysed before. Wasn’t the conclusion that in fact the government would be taking the majority of the stake for itself because the 10% share would not be owned by the employees individually and they would only be getting a proportion of the dividends. In short a proposal dressed up as giving something to employees is in fact a proposal which will take steal from them and the companies they work for.0 -
Corbyn's position on everything other than Brexit seems much the same as it was in 2017 (and no doubt would have been in 2015, 2010, 2005, 2001 and 1997, if he'd been Labour leader at any of those elections). It's all utter garbage, of course, but since the Conservative Party has joined him in peddling fantasy, that might not be a barrier to him becoming next PM.
As for his Brexit policy, it remains as convoluted and irrational as ever. Apparently he'll do anything to stop a no-deal Brexit, except whip his MPs to vote in the one way which would unquestionably have avoided one, natch.0 -
It's highly unlikely TRUE mortgage rates issued on new mortgages would go negative after fees and so forth due to the rake above base. If rates hit -2% then maybe but that's highly unlikely right now I feel.rcs1000 said:
I haven't read the article but my understanding is that's not what the consumer paid. That's what investors paid for Danish mortgage bond0 -
Actually, I didn't see the speech at all but I have read it.JBriskinindyref2 said:Unfortunately only saw highlights of the "big speech".
RE: Herdson's point 5-
Corbyn stated he wanted a second referendum (for the first time?) with two plausible options, one of which would be remain.
Assuming he said what the Press Office released, he actually said
And if there is a general election this autumn, Labour will commit to holding a public vote, to give voters the final say with credible options for both sides including the option to remain
That doesn't imply necessarily only two options. I accept that he might have clarified it in the Q&A, which I've not seen - though I'll predict blind that he didn't.
What he didn't say was
- How long he'd take to renegotiate
- What side Labour would back (if any) in an EURef2
- What 'credible options' means
- What happens if Exit Day occurs first
The link is here;
https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyn-speech-corby-today/0 -
Has the Mail ever apologised for anything?Peter_the_Punter said:
Didn't the Daily Mail give him a lot of support and publicity?Cyclefree said:OK - since we’ve already gone off topic, am reposting this FPT.
On my list of British people who have done some of the most harm in the last 20 years will be one (ex) Dr Andrew Wakefield.
In a sane world he would be shunned and having to pick up litter with his bare hands to earn a living not being feted and fawned over by super-models and credulous and/or worried parents.
Has it ever apologised?0 -
"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."rcs1000 said:
Indeed. That was the auction price for the bonds.rcs1000 said:
I haven't read the article but my understanding is that's not what the consumer paid. That's what investors paid for Danish mortgage bondJBriskinindyref2 said:
Mortgage rates can go negative-rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
SNIP
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-stunned-as-negative-rates-sweep-across-danish-mortgages
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry0 -
The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.0
-
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.0
-
He definitely mentioned two options in the speech. Where that leaves their policy is anyone's guess.david_herdson said:
Actually, I didn't see the speech at all but I have read it.JBriskinindyref2 said:Unfortunately only saw highlights of the "big speech".
RE: Herdson's point 5-
Corbyn stated he wanted a second referendum (for the first time?) with two plausible options, one of which would be remain.
Assuming he said what the Press Office released, he actually said
And if there is a general election this autumn, Labour will commit to holding a public vote, to give voters the final say with credible options for both sides including the option to remain
That doesn't imply necessarily only two options. I accept that he might have clarified it in the Q&A, which I've not seen - though I'll predict blind that he didn't.
The link is here;
https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyn-speech-corby-today/0 -
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.eek said:Mentioned in the previous thread but worth repeating
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1163395649909514240
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed.
Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
0 -
Not even “Hurrah for the Blackshirts”.not_on_fire said:
Has the Mail ever apologised for anything?Peter_the_Punter said:
Didn't the Daily Mail give him a lot of support and publicity?Cyclefree said:OK - since we’ve already gone off topic, am reposting this FPT.
On my list of British people who have done some of the most harm in the last 20 years will be one (ex) Dr Andrew Wakefield.
In a sane world he would be shunned and having to pick up litter with his bare hands to earn a living not being feted and fawned over by super-models and credulous and/or worried parents.
Has it ever apologised?0 -
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.0 -
You say that, but what if we get another hung parliament?rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
0 -
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
0 -
True, May called an election and it only made things worse !RobD said:
You say that, but what if we get another hung parliament?rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
0 -
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
0 -
No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!0
-
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.-1 -
My vote will depend entirely on how strong Corbyn is in the polls and whether Brexit has happened.Pulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.0 -
Before or after Boris started dishing out sweeties?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
0 -
There are no good choices from here and as I said I'd prefer the deal. But that's not being espoused by any of the parties right now.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.0 -
Or better if you want a No Deal Brexit...Pulpstar said:
True, May called an election and it only made things worse !RobD said:
You say that, but what if we get another hung parliament?rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
0 -
One of the points never discussed is what were the average interest rates world-wide during 1997-2010 compared to 2010-2019.Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
The Tories have borrowed more than all Labour governments put together but they got the massive "interest dividend" thank to QE in the last 9 years.
The interest charge the UK government [ indeed all governments ] pay today is nothing compared to the previous decade even though debt is now over 85% of GDP when it was less than Germany's as a % of GDP in 2010.
0 -
Labour's 2017 manifesto was so heavy on spending commitments that they have nowhere really to go with new policies.0
-
Wider than most years of the last Labour government. And the Brexit idiocy will certainly increase it further.Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
0 -
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
TodayRobD said:
Before or after Boris started dishing out sweeties?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
0 -
https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families/applying-for-settled-statusScott_P said:
We have asked all our employees to read this carefully.0 -
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.1 -
0
-
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
It is called MMT - Modern Monetary Theory. If Corbyn wins then UK will be the testing laboratory for this new idea*, which basically involves printing money. US may follow if Dems win.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
* Well, they say 'new' but I have a vague sense I've seen this one before.0 -
Even another hung parliament might be better than what we currently have:RobD said:
You say that, but what if we get another hung parliament?rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
1) Politicians may be more willing to compromise knowing another election is 5 years away
2) Some of the party leaders (including Corbyn) will likely move on allowing for fresh thinking
3) Some of the older MPs will have been replaced by younger MPs more willing to toe the party line.0 -
Where is the national debt?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
0 -
I think that IS the plan but I don't see it being possible by 31 Oct. An extension into 2020 will be agreed, I think. I am not persuaded by 'Do or Die!" - but luckily for Boris, most people do appear to be.algarkirk said:Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
0 -
Of course Trump has been testing his own version of MMT - balloon the deficit for tax cuts for the rich.0
-
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.0 -
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
-
-
Dunno. As I understand it Murray is writing the manifesto this summer and the plan is it will be far more radical than last time.Artist said:Labour's 2017 manifesto was so heavy on spending commitments that they have nowhere really to go with new policies.
Of course, born-again sensible bank manager John McDonnell may overrule him.0 -
Why is that relevant?SandyRentool said:
Where is the national debt?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
the 2010 Government inherited a collosal deficit, should it just have stopped paying benefits, for the NHS etc etc
The Government from 2010 to now has managed to massively reduce the deficit whilst maintaining and then massively increasing employment.
It has been an amazing success in that regard0 -
Hi
Referendums where one of the options available was not honestly or correctly portrayed should be ignored or at least re-run, yes.Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Ideally we wouldn’t have referendums in the first place. They do not work with our Parliamentary system and allow demagogues to pretend that complex problems have simple solutions. Or they become a protest vote on a completely different issue.
0 -
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we could instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
Boris and the Heartbreakers. The EU won't back down.Scott_P said:0 -
Maybe we could - if so many people hadn't been telling them at the time how naive they were being.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
Very few future students are eligible to vote. It might persuade some gullible parents.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
0 -
Mayor Pete was quite good on the deficit these last couple of days. If he carries on like that he'll have no chance.rottenborough said:
It is called MMT - Modern Monetary Theory. If Corbyn wins then UK will be the testing laboratory for this new idea*, which basically involves printing money. US may follow if Dems win.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
* Well, they say 'new' but I have a vague sense I've seen this one before.
But I fear you may be right. It's that long since Britain's had proper inflation that the threat of its return may well be wished away as scaremongering or at the least, downplayed far too far.0 -
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
Define "Brexit".Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.0 -
I am sick to death of hearing and reading remarks about democracy and referendums which imply the two are synonymous and interchangeable.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
This, of course, is why students have been repeatedly screwed over in the last 20 years. Very cynical politics by both parties.felix said:
Very few future students are eligible to vote. It might persuade some gullible parents.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
0 -
Anorak , I am here. Glad you like it, as you say very pleasant and whilst not asAnorak said:First? Hmm - been a while.
Both parties now actively electioneering. Both leaders actively avoiding the scrutiny of an interview, and appealing to their populist base. What a shitfest we are in for.
PS If Malc is around, I got the Woodford Reserve and am enjoying it very much. Very good value, if not as good a proper single malt!
good as a single malt and a nice change now and again.0 -
We are still borrowing money in the economic good times and adding to the debt.Currystardog said:
Why is that relevant?SandyRentool said:
Where is the national debt?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
the 2010 Government inherited a collosal deficit, should it just have stopped paying benefits, for the NHS etc etc
The Government from 2010 to now has managed to massively reduce the deficit whilst maintaining and then massively increasing employment.
It has been an amazing success in that regard
We are borrowing to pay debt interest.
What happened to 'mend the roof when the sun is shining'?0 -
You were all too busy ramping the joys of the EU as I recall.Chris said:
Maybe we could - if so many people hadn't been telling them at the time how naive they were being.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
Agreed, but only if both sides can be guaranteed to lose.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
0 -
And people should be much more concerned about what the leaked documents said about the impact of No Deal on care services, which are already teetering close enough to the brink.rottenborough said:0 -
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?rottenborough said:
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
Since none of them have been implemented by Theresa May (obviously), most of the 2017 manifesto points are still relevent today, at least in the eyes of Labour and Labour Swing voters.Artist said:Labour's 2017 manifesto was so heavy on spending commitments that they have nowhere really to go with new policies.
0 -
I assume that's posted in irony but on the off-chance it's not, Vote Leave consistently criticised the EU for putting ideology and politics ahead of pragmatism, the economy and subsidiarity. Of all the people involved, they have least scope to complain about how the EU has acted.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Besides, there is a deal.0 -
I think the last Labour manifesto really caught the mood I was looking for just right. It addressed the things that bothered me and the numbers looked okay to me. Above all it was a plan that could lead to the country getting better.rottenborough said:
Dunno. As I understand it Murray is writing the manifesto this summer and the plan is it will be far more radical than last time.Artist said:Labour's 2017 manifesto was so heavy on spending commitments that they have nowhere really to go with new policies.
Of course, born-again sensible bank manager John McDonnell may overrule him.
I think it was a fluke. I think it was drafted with the expectation that Labour was about to not just be defeated but possibly knocked from the position it held in British politics as the only opponent to the Conservatives who could realistically beat them. As such it was pretty much a genuine statement of the party's aims rather than an attempt to put together a winning coalition.
So I don't think the 2019 manifesto will have the impact of the 2019 one. Unless I'm wrong, and there is some political genius at work in the Labour Party office somewhere. Which isn't impossible.
So I can see that it might just happen that Labour wins an overall majority.0 -
?JBriskinindyref2 said:
You were all too busy ramping the joys of the EU as I recall.Chris said:
Maybe we could - if so many people hadn't been telling them at the time how naive they were being.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
I don't think I was posting here at all at the time of the referendum.0
