politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Induction Technique. Comparing and combining betting markets
Options
Comments
-
There a noticeable higher employment of Indian immigrants than those from Pakistan & Bangladesh.Gardenwalker said:
I was talking about EU migration.another_richard said:
Do you have that data ?Gardenwalker said:
I agree with @OnlyLivingBoy that there is no point in simply trading anecdote.eek said:
No I mean comment on what I see - East Europeans with children joining the 16 hour a week brigade.malcolmg said:
On here they think that people on benefits are living in a land of milk and honey , half the time abroad and other half in their mansions, all funded by being lazy tossers.Benpointer said:
This is utter bollocks. Have you any expereince of the welfare system in action?eek said:
Nope, in a lot of cases especially up North productive youngsters came along and then discovered how to play our welfare system. And being organised a lot have discovered how to play our welfare system better than the locals can.
No 'productive youngster' would choose that route if they had a genuine alternative of productive employment - living on welfare is pretty crap.
The data says immigration has been overwhelmingly positive.
The problem, however, is that our in-work credits system incentivises what you are talking about and to most fair-minded people, it shouldn’t be allowed.
The most recent ONS data gives unemployment at 3.7% UK nationals, 3.5% EU nationals and 7.0% non-EU nationals.
Those non-EU rates surprise me, but one imagines if you drill into the data the issue is overwhelmingly immigrants from poorer Muslim communities, and Somalis.
Other groups, like West Africans, will probably overperform.
The highest employment rates are of those from South Africa followed by Australia & New Zealand.
Within the EU total there will be variances between the type of immigrant.
I would like to see data differentiated on socioeconomic class rather than on country of origin - an educated English speaking Pole has more in common, in terms of employability in this country, with an educated English speaking German or an educated English speaking Indian than a working class Pole with limited English language skills.0 -
0
-
PC definitely will be.AndyJS said:Are the SNP and PC in favour of an election as soon as possible?
Just think of all those juicy constituencies in which the LDs are going to stand aside in their favour!0 -
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be0 -
But indefinititely in default of the EU treaties - because we have already repealed the law that gives EU law supremacy. That takes effect on 31st October.Tabman said:
But if the EU don't enforce 31 October date, then we remain indefinitely.Charles said:
Wouldn’t that mess up the Remainers plans though...CarlottaVance said:
That’s the only path open to them. Jeremy to lay the motion Tuesday?justin124 said:
It is not in his gift if the Commons is willing to install an alternative PM.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
1. Jezza doing something which take priority over their other plans
2. Unlikely (?) to be successful - in which case time is wasted and Boris strengthened
3. If successful need to find a new PM
4. Corbyn goes first (?) unlikely to be successful - if not he has wasted time
5. If no alternative found then an election where Boris sets the date (can an election be called while Parliament is prorogued it does it need to wait until it returns to move a writ or whatever?)
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brexit-secretary-signs-order-to-scrap-1972-brussels-act-ending-all-eu-law-in-the-uk
I'm not sure how the Coalition of C**** are going to put that back together again in three days.....0 -
You certainly cannot reason with diehard Remainer extremists noGallowgate said:
You can’t reason with extremists @bigjohnowls. You should know.bigjohnowls said:
The Survation says 18% want No DealHYUFD said:
That did not have a majority either but then further extension and revoke also failed to get a majority, as I said the only majority was for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, exactly as Boris is aiming forbigjohnowls said:
How many backed No DealHYUFD said:
Corbyn doesn't have the moral authority for further extension which voters opposed 47% to 41% with Survation yesterday.eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
52% of voters back the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop with a technical alternative as Boris wants in the same poll
Wake up HYUFD0 -
The Tories were first in Wales in the last Westminster Wales only pollTheuniondivvie said:
PC definitely will be.AndyJS said:Are the SNP and PC in favour of an election as soon as possible?
Just think of all those juicy constituencies in which the LDs are going to stand aside in their favour!0 -
Surely the repeal of the FTPA requiresa one-line bill? Plenty of time to get that done. It' not the process that is the problem - it is the political will from Labour. Who are now frit of the voters.RochdalePioneers said:
I'm having a Twitter debate with OGH. Why can't we just repeal the FTPA? Surely it's in the interest of both sides0 -
This blog post on Cummings is definitely worth a read. Perhaps someone like @cyclefree can make an article out of it.
It's also crystalised my thinking about the no-deal brinkmanship. Cummings is most definitely driving a Fiat 500 towards a train.
https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/?fbclid=IwAR3eSCo1A_6djhwQc7n59IjiRz6B6jFM65916To8-tYS_4uDtmnN8jmv-Uo0 -
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
The rebel alliance have the ability to stop everything by a VONC and then putting in a temp leader...have they got the bottle?0
-
When May made her election announcement in Downing Street, she included the date proposed!Chris said:
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
And that's where the plan falls down - there is no way anyone is going to let Boris choose the election date....Chris said:
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
-
The Nazi’s pushed for an election in 1932, lost seats, but then managed to hoodwink the President into putting them into power.
Just a thought!0 -
Of course the prime minister can say anything he likes. But the motion before the Commons wouldn't specify a date.justin124 said:
When May made her election announcement in Downing Street, she included the date proposed!Chris said:
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
What if the response is we abstain unless you seek an extension beyond Election Day?numbertwelve said:0 -
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be0 -
Er... if election day is 17th October no extension is required.dixiedean said:
What if the response is we abstain unless you seek an extension beyond Election Day?numbertwelve said:
Edit: But of course as has been pointed out, the Remain opposition would have to trust BoJo to stick to the date... tricky.0 -
Ah yes... good point.eek said:
And that's where the plan falls down - there is no way anyone is going to let Boris choose the election date....Chris said:
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
I'd also argue that what they need from it (good quality technical tuition) can be sourced from there. You don't need to pay a premium price for an Oxbridge or DurEx brand and Tees is probably more willing to tailor the course.eek said:
I suspect they don't pay the market rate and it's already far cheaper than the other options.FrancisUrquhart said:
They should ask for their money back on the business studies at least...ranked 83 out of 122.Gallowgate said:
It’s good enough for the huge, american conglomerate that I work for to use it for both engineering and business studies/management degrees. It also has a reasonably big International Student population.FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not saying much as it is ranked as one of the worst uni's in the country, albeit still higher than Sunderland.Gallowgate said:
Ironically Teesside University is one of its better current exports.0 -
It's why any election request will be preceded by a demand for an extension because Wednesday proved that he cannot be trusted.Benpointer said:
Ah yes... good point.eek said:
And that's where the plan falls down - there is no way anyone is going to let Boris choose the election date....Chris said:
Under the FTPA there can't be "a motion for an early election," only a motion for an election. The date of the election would then be decided by the prime minister.CarlottaVance said:0 -
That piece of data doesn't assist in deciding whether immigration is net pos or net neg. It is comparing the populations, not the situations, against one another. Instead of comparing Peter against Pavel, you have to compare the situation where Pavel is in Warsaw to the one where he's in Wolverhampton.another_richard said:
Do you have that data ?Gardenwalker said:
I agree with @OnlyLivingBoy that there is no point in simply trading anecdote.eek said:
No I mean comment on what I see - East Europeans with children joining the 16 hour a week brigade.malcolmg said:
On here they think that people on benefits are living in a land of milk and honey , half the time abroad and other half in their mansions, all funded by being lazy tossers.Benpointer said:
This is utter bollocks. Have you any expereince of the welfare system in action?eek said:
Nope, in a lot of cases especially up North productive youngsters came along and then discovered how to play our welfare system. And being organised a lot have discovered how to play our welfare system better than the locals can.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't think either part of that is correct. There are many other countries in Europe with a far shorter tail of the unproductive and uneducated. The reasons why we are different are I suspect complex and tied into our history of industrialisation and deindustrialization, both of which were particularly brutal. I imagine with some effort we could do something about it.
Also, I believe that the data tell us we are disproportionately importing the young, educated and productive from Europe. The kind of people who would be sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs are probably still sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs.
No 'productive youngster' would choose that route if they had a genuine alternative of productive employment - living on welfare is pretty crap.
The data says immigration has been overwhelmingly positive.
The problem, however, is that our in-work credits system incentivises what you are talking about and to most fair-minded people, it shouldn’t be allowed.
The most recent ONS data gives unemployment at 3.7% UK nationals, 3.5% EU nationals and 7.0% non-EU nationals.0 -
Then the Election Date would need to be made explicit. And unalterable, regardless of a string of unexpected Bank Holidays, washing his hair, plague of frogs, etc.Benpointer said:
Er... if election day is 17th October no extension is required.dixiedean said:
What if the response is we abstain unless you seek an extension beyond Election Day?numbertwelve said:
Edit: But of course as has been pointed out, the Remain opposition would have to trust BoJo to stick to the date... tricky.
Trust in the goodwill of the PM has broken down already.0 -
Have they got the numbers?timmo said:The rebel alliance have the ability to stop everything by a VONC and then putting in a temp leader...have they got the bottle?
0 -
I thought we'd enacted all EU law into UK lawMarqueeMark said:
But indefinititely in default of the EU treaties - because we have already repealed the law that gives EU law supremacy. That takes effect on 31st October.Tabman said:
But if the EU don't enforce 31 October date, then we remain indefinitely.Charles said:
Wouldn’t that mess up the Remainers plans though...CarlottaVance said:
That’s the only path open to them. Jeremy to lay the motion Tuesday?justin124 said:
It is not in his gift if the Commons is willing to install an alternative PM.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
1. Jezza doing something which take priority over their other plans
2. Unlikely (?) to be successful - in which case time is wasted and Boris strengthened
3. If successful need to find a new PM
4. Corbyn goes first (?) unlikely to be successful - if not he has wasted time
5. If no alternative found then an election where Boris sets the date (can an election be called while Parliament is prorogued it does it need to wait until it returns to move a writ or whatever?)
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brexit-secretary-signs-order-to-scrap-1972-brussels-act-ending-all-eu-law-in-the-uk
I'm not sure how the Coalition of C**** are going to put that back together again in three days.....0 -
It is not their choice. They are bound by treaty law unless all sides agree to a change in the date.Tabman said:
But if the EU don't enforce 31 October date, then we remain indefinitely.Charles said:
Wouldn’t that mess up the Remainers plans though...CarlottaVance said:
That’s the only path open to them. Jeremy to lay the motion Tuesday?justin124 said:
It is not in his gift if the Commons is willing to install an alternative PM.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
1. Jezza doing something which take priority over their other plans
2. Unlikely (?) to be successful - in which case time is wasted and Boris strengthened
3. If successful need to find a new PM
4. Corbyn goes first (?) unlikely to be successful - if not he has wasted time
5. If no alternative found then an election where Boris sets the date (can an election be called while Parliament is prorogued it does it need to wait until it returns to move a writ or whatever?)0 -
With all the court cases bandying about, could the government challenge the speaker in the courts if he approves an amendable section 24 debate?0
-
Follow up - would this delay any decision until after judicial review thereby reaching when parliament is prorogued?0
-
Indeed.Drutt said:
That piece of data doesn't assist in deciding whether immigration is net pos or net neg. It is comparing the populations, not the situations, against one another. Instead of comparing Peter against Pavel, you have to compare the situation where Pavel is in Warsaw to the one where he's in Wolverhampton.another_richard said:
Do you have that data ?Gardenwalker said:
I agree with @OnlyLivingBoy that there is no point in simply trading anecdote.eek said:
No I mean comment on what I see - East Europeans with children joining the 16 hour a week brigade.malcolmg said:
On here they think that people on benefits are living in a land of milk and honey , half the time abroad and other half in their mansions, all funded by being lazy tossers.Benpointer said:
This is utter bollocks. Have you any expereince of the welfare system in action?eek said:
Nope, in a lot of cases especially up North productive youngsters came along and then discovered how to play our welfare system. And being organised a lot have discovered how to play our welfare system better than the locals can.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't think either part of that is correct. There are many other countries in Europe with a far shorter tail of the unproductive and uneducated. The reasons why we are different are I suspect complex and tied into our history of industrialisation and deindustrialization, both of which were particularly brutal. I imagine with some effort we could do something about it.
Also, I believe that the data tell us we are disproportionately importing the young, educated and productive from Europe. The kind of people who would be sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs are probably still sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs.
No 'productive youngster' would choose that route if they had a genuine alternative of productive employment - living on welfare is pretty crap.
The data says immigration has been overwhelmingly positive.
The problem, however, is that our in-work credits system incentivises what you are talking about and to most fair-minded people, it shouldn’t be allowed.
The most recent ONS data gives unemployment at 3.7% UK nationals, 3.5% EU nationals and 7.0% non-EU nationals.
It doesn't show differences between types of employment or how they vary between different locations.0 -
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:0 -
No. The Speaker is omniscient in his ruling on procedure. He can rule that only those who perform 50 press ups before speaking are in order if the whim takes him. The only solution is to remove him. Rather like the PM.Blue_rog said:With all the court cases bandying about, could the government challenge the speaker in the courts if he approves an amendable section 24 debate?
Yet another way our Constitution is outdated.0 -
But not beyond 31st Ocober 2019.Tabman said:
I thought we'd enacted all EU law into UK lawMarqueeMark said:
But indefinititely in default of the EU treaties - because we have already repealed the law that gives EU law supremacy. That takes effect on 31st October.Tabman said:
But if the EU don't enforce 31 October date, then we remain indefinitely.Charles said:
Wouldn’t that mess up the Remainers plans though...CarlottaVance said:
That’s the only path open to them. Jeremy to lay the motion Tuesday?justin124 said:
It is not in his gift if the Commons is willing to install an alternative PM.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
1. Jezza doing something which take priority over their other plans
2. Unlikely (?) to be successful - in which case time is wasted and Boris strengthened
3. If successful need to find a new PM
4. Corbyn goes first (?) unlikely to be successful - if not he has wasted time
5. If no alternative found then an election where Boris sets the date (can an election be called while Parliament is prorogued it does it need to wait until it returns to move a writ or whatever?)
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brexit-secretary-signs-order-to-scrap-1972-brussels-act-ending-all-eu-law-in-the-uk
I'm not sure how the Coalition of C**** are going to put that back together again in three days.....0 -
They are uniting to try to block No Deal Brexit and you cannot conflate that with "blocking Brexit" but leavers do it all the time quite intentionally and dishonestly. They are trying to block No Deal because there is no mandate for it, the leave campaigns us assured us that we would only leave with a deal. Only 26% of voters want a No Deal Brexit so good luck uniting the country behind that policy.MarqueeMark said:
He's going to unify the country against those MPs voting to block Brexit.OllyT said:
I thought Johnson was aiming to unify the country, or was that just another of his endless lies? You don't unify the country by opting for a type of Brexit that the leave campaigns themselves ruled out. Any short term political gain will be a pyrrhic victory.MarqueeMark said:
He will, when it comes down to "us" or "them"....eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
Just watch.....0 -
MPs voted against the Withdrawal Agreement and against No Deal and thus against Brexit.OllyT said:
They are uniting to try to block No Deal Brexit and you cannot conflate that with "blocking Brexit" but leavers do it all the time quite intentionally and dishonestly. They are trying to block No Deal because there is no mandate for it, the leave campaigns us assured us that we would only leave with a deal. Only 26% of voters want a No Deal Brexit so good luck uniting the country behind that policy.MarqueeMark said:
He's going to unify the country against those MPs voting to block Brexit.OllyT said:
I thought Johnson was aiming to unify the country, or was that just another of his endless lies? You don't unify the country by opting for a type of Brexit that the leave campaigns themselves ruled out. Any short term political gain will be a pyrrhic victory.MarqueeMark said:
He will, when it comes down to "us" or "them"....eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
Just watch.....
With Survation this weekend only 40% back Revoke and Remain, only 41% back extension again and 52% back Boris' policy of the Withdrawal Agreement with a technical alternative to the backstop. Good luck opposing that!0 -
And leavers want to make it up as they go along....Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:0 -
These rather desperate threats to upend the constitution by the government are wholly counterproductive. First, MPs are only going to stiffen their sinews in response. Secondly, the court cases about prorogation do not take place in a vacuum. A government threatening to dismantle longstanding conventions is going to get less leeway from the courts. Thirdly, contempt of Parliament is an offence and the Commons can and has in the past taken action against offenders (a sentence of over 12 months in prison for a miscreant Prime Minister would have some intriguing consequences). Fourthly, the monarchy is really not going to want to open a Pandora’s box that was last opened in the reign of Queen Anne. Fifthly, the courts could be expected to intervene.
In reality, these wild threats show weakness rather than strength.0 -
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament0 -
This is all bollocks @HYUFD. You know it. It doesn’t matter if WA minus backstop has a majority. That’s fine. But that does not in any way logically lead to no deal.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I will repeat: there is no popular mandate for no deal. This is a fact.0 -
Although they have a very good Centre for Responsible ManagementFrancisUrquhart said:
This is my general issue with the way university expansion has gone. We have created 130+ universities that in order to become unis (rather than polys / HE facilities) have to had to add a wider range of subjects. The result a dilution at massive cost, and lots and lots of crap degrees.Freggles said:
It's good at a few niche subjects like computer aided animation and more practical things like social work iircFrancisUrquhart said:
They should ask for their money back on the business studies at least...ranked 83 out of 122.Gallowgate said:
It’s good enough for the huge, american conglomerate that I work for to use it for both engineering and business studies/management degrees. It also has a reasonably big International Student population.FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not saying much as it is ranked as one of the worst uni's in the country, albeit still higher than Sunderland.Gallowgate said:
Ironically Teesside University is one of its better current exports.
Very very few old polys have become excellent all round unis, and often in order to offer the "wider range" they have come up with all sorts of crap rather than offering say STEM.
Winchester was decent teacher training place, Coventry for practical mechanical engineering, Harper Adams for agriculture. Now all piss poor ranked unis.
0 -
Interesting concept - a law passed by Parliament being illegal.Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:
I keep thinking we've reached peak Brexiteer stupidity, but no.0 -
Murdo 'Queen's 11' Fraser and Adam 'Always good to see a team wearing green thumped 6-1' Tomkins, your boys took a hell of a beating today (mainly by being really shite despite Celtic being mediocre).0
-
He's talking about a scenario that would require years of negotiation to finalise agreement, after a WA with the backstop is passed ...… not something that can be whipped up in weeks.HYUFD said:
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
0 -
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.HYUFD said:
You certainly cannot reason with diehard Remainer extremists noGallowgate said:
You can’t reason with extremists @bigjohnowls. You should know.bigjohnowls said:
The Survation says 18% want No DealHYUFD said:
That did not have a majority either but then further extension and revoke also failed to get a majority, as I said the only majority was for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, exactly as Boris is aiming forbigjohnowls said:
How many backed No DealHYUFD said:
Corbyn doesn't have the moral authority for further extension which voters opposed 47% to 41% with Survation yesterday.eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
52% of voters back the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop with a technical alternative as Boris wants in the same poll
Wake up HYUFD0 -
What's more, this theory all hangs on this "technical solution" miraculously emerging.Gallowgate said:
This is all bollocks @HYUFD. You know it. It doesn’t matter if WA minus backstop has a majority. That’s fine. But that does not in any way logically lead to no deal.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I will repeat: there is no popular mandate for no deal. This is a fact.0 -
This looks plausible. A normal election sees Labour votes switching to Conservatives so Conservatives win or Conservative votes switching to Labour so Labour wins. 2017 wasn't a normal election and the upcoming one won't be either.Ratters said:
VONC will only occur in the event that the legislative route fails, i.e. when Parliament returns in October.CarlottaVance said:The immediate option open to the house is to VONC. Meanwhile Boris will be all over the TV saying “look how they’re trying to sabotage getting a deal” and “ Ill ask for an extension if they drop the backstop”.
There are very good reasons for this:
1) The fact that the the prorogation cuts short the 14 day period for forming an alternative government. If they fail in those 5 days then Johnson chooses the election date (likely post-Brexit, so not worth the risk)
2) Conservative rebels are understandably more open to defying the party whip than they are voting down their own government - so legislation is easier to pass (even with the latest threats of deselection)
3) There is still time for a VONC in October if needed - and it will be clear that there's no alternative to stop no deal by that point and so a caretaker government (Corbyn or otherwise) is more likely to be agreed
I agree that the politics of this generally works in Johnson's favour in terms of coalescing the Brexit vote to his party, and he'll spin any extension as being forced on him by a "Remoaner Parliament". So he may well lose the battle but win the war. But if the Conservatives win a majority on a no deal manifesto, then so be it - they will also own the consequences.
It all depends on tactical voting and whether former Labour party voters will stay with them in Labour marginals rather than switching to Lib Dems. Also Scotland will represent a solid 50 seats for Remain. Conservatives won't necessarily get a majority IMO0 -
It’s an imperfect analogy - as are pretty well all analogies - since it suggests he’ll die at the end of the process, which obviously isn’t the case. And even on the metaphorical level ignores the fact that those likely to suffer the consequences of the game of chicken are lots of people who are not Dominic Cummings. About whom he doesn’t give two shits.Tabman said:This blog post on Cummings is definitely worth a read. Perhaps someone like @cyclefree can make an article out of it.
It's also crystalised my thinking about the no-deal brinkmanship. Cummings is most definitely driving a Fiat 500 towards a train.
https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/?fbclid=IwAR3eSCo1A_6djhwQc7n59IjiRz6B6jFM65916To8-tYS_4uDtmnN8jmv-Uo
This bit was quite good, though.
As I said: I’m speculating. But it fits my existing mental model of Dominic Cummings, which is that he reads these fascinating, interesting ideas from brilliant people, and takes completely the wrong message from them. For one thing, a key principle of the Rationalist blogosphere that we both admire is the “principle of charity”, the idea that “if you don’t understand how someone could possibly believe something as stupid as they do, that this is more likely a failure of understanding on your part than a failure of reason on theirs”, rather than assuming people are stupid or evil....0 -
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
The negotiation and execution of treaties is part of the Royal Prerogative. Parliament cannot simply ignore that because it finds it incovenient. If they want to change that they need to introduce primary legislation specifically changing that and removing the Royal Prerogative powers from the Executive. I have long said on here they should do this but until they do they don't get to pick which bits of the constitution they ignore. Remainer arrogance and stupidity keeps plumbing new depths.Chris said:
Interesting concept - a law passed by Parliament being illegal.Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:
I keep thinking we've reached peak Brexiteer stupidity, but no.0 -
Germany invaded Poland today 80 years ago0
-
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here
0 -
Great news, so once Johnson discloses the technical alternative and demonstrates the means by which it will be implemented by 31 October it should be job done. It’s hard to see why he’s being so coy about his solution.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament0 -
I don't doubt that Cummings doesn't give two shits (perhaps to extend the metaphor, he has a James Bond style ejector seat to get out of the car before it crashes but all the passengers die).Nigelb said:
It’s an imperfect analogy - as are pretty well all analogies - since it suggests he’ll die at the end of the process, which obviously isn’t the case. And even on the metaphorical level ignores the fact that those likely to suffer the consequences of the game of chicken are lots of people who are not Dominic Cummings. About whom he doesn’t give two shits.Tabman said:This blog post on Cummings is definitely worth a read. Perhaps someone like @cyclefree can make an article out of it.
It's also crystalised my thinking about the no-deal brinkmanship. Cummings is most definitely driving a Fiat 500 towards a train.
https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/?fbclid=IwAR3eSCo1A_6djhwQc7n59IjiRz6B6jFM65916To8-tYS_4uDtmnN8jmv-Uo
This bit was quite good, though.
As I said: I’m speculating. But it fits my existing mental model of Dominic Cummings, which is that he reads these fascinating, interesting ideas from brilliant people, and takes completely the wrong message from them. For one thing, a key principle of the Rationalist blogosphere that we both admire is the “principle of charity”, the idea that “if you don’t understand how someone could possibly believe something as stupid as they do, that this is more likely a failure of understanding on your part than a failure of reason on theirs”, rather than assuming people are stupid or evil....
But I think the key point remains. The EU will be damaged in a no deal, but not catastrophically so, and is prepared to take the damage to keep the train on the rails than derail it.
I must admit I didn't quite follow the italicised quote point. Is the author saying Cummings doesn't get this point, or does get it?0 -
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.HYUFD said:
You certainly cannot reason with diehard Remainer extremists noGallowgate said:
You can’t reason with extremists @bigjohnowls. You should know.bigjohnowls said:
The Survation says 18% want No DealHYUFD said:
That did not have a majority either but then further extension and revoke also failed to get a majority, as I said the only majority was for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, exactly as Boris is aiming forbigjohnowls said:
How many backed No DealHYUFD said:
Corbyn doesn't have the moral authority for further extension which voters opposed 47% to 41% with Survation yesterday.eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
52% of voters back the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop with a technical alternative as Boris wants in the same poll
Wake up HYUFD
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.0 -
They are cuckoo TUDTheuniondivvie said:
Internal debate through the medium of newspaper articles & twitter? A novel interpretation.Luckyguy1983 said:
It's called internal debate, I realise that's not a familiar concept in SNP circles.Theuniondivvie said:Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of lads.
#ToryCivilWar
https://twitter.com/RobertTyreBute/status/1168102419290578945?s=200 -
I have made no comment on extension and revoke having majority support. I support extension but not revoke on its merits.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I am pointing out that you repeatedly claim no deal has majority support when all evidence shows it does not. I can only assume this is because you cannot support no deal on its merits and know it is folly.0 -
No HY believes polls confer moral authority for Johnson’s government policies to be enacted, I’m not sure wether survation give more authority than YouGov we will have to waitGallowgate said:
This is all bollocks @HYUFD. You know it. It doesn’t matter if WA minus backstop has a majority. That’s fine. But that does not in any way logically lead to no deal.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I will repeat: there is no popular mandate for no deal. This is a fact.0 -
Fine for someone who has collected all the money from said places and can live the high life anywhere they wish.Charles said:
Towns and cities develop where they do because of reasons.malcolmg said:
There speaks a real ToryTGOHF said:
The Americans have the right idea - just leave it to become a ghost town.Gallowgate said:Hartlepool IS reinventing itself. It just takes a long time and a lot of people suffer.
The regeneration around the marina is lovely.
If that reason is no longer relevant (e.g. a closed coal mine) then the community needs to find a new sense of purpose. That could be new industries, or as a commuter town or something else. But if it doesn't have a purpose when why insist that it continues to exist?
[yes, this is the same philosophical argument that makes sense for the dissolution of the Union if one of the consistent parts decides that it no longer has merit]0 -
I've given up responding to HYUFD, it's akin to banging your head against a brick wall. I'd give pif I were youGallowgate said:
This is all bollocks @HYUFD. You know it. It doesn’t matter if WA minus backstop has a majority. That’s fine. But that does not in any way logically lead to no deal.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I will repeat: there is no popular mandate for no deal. This is a fact.0 -
Leavers will be foaming at the mouth at those numbers , especially as the one they wanted stopped from coming to UK is by far the largestanother_richard said:
Do you have that data ?Gardenwalker said:
I agree with @OnlyLivingBoy that there is no point in simply trading anecdote.eek said:
No I mean comment on what I see - East Europeans with children joining the 16 hour a week brigade.malcolmg said:
On here they think that people on benefits are living in a land of milk and honey , half the time abroad and other half in their mansions, all funded by being lazy tossers.Benpointer said:
This is utter bollocks. Have you any expereince of the welfare system in action?eek said:
Nope, in a lot of cases especially up North productive youngsters came along and then discovered how to play our welfare system. And being organised a lot have discovered how to play our welfare system better than the locals can.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't think either part of that is correct. There are many other countries in Europe with a far shorter tail of the unproductive and uneducated. The reasons why we are different are I suspect complex and tied into our history of industrialisation and deindustrialization, both of which were particularly brutal. I imagine with some effort we could do something about it.
Also, I believe that the data tell us we are disproportionately importing the young, educated and productive from Europe. The kind of people who would be sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs are probably still sitting on their arse in their equivalent of Hartlepool smoking tabs.
No 'productive youngster' would choose that route if they had a genuine alternative of productive employment - living on welfare is pretty crap.
The data says immigration has been overwhelmingly positive.
The problem, however, is that our in-work credits system incentivises what you are talking about and to most fair-minded people, it shouldn’t be allowed.
The most recent ONS data gives unemployment at 3.7% UK nationals, 3.5% EU nationals and 7.0% non-EU nationals.0 -
Perhaps I didn’t quote enough of it - he’s saying it’s a principle Cummins seems to ignore (which is not a great surprise).Tabman said:
I don't doubt that Cummings doesn't give two shits (perhaps to extend the metaphor, he has a James Bond style ejector seat to get out of the car before it crashes but all the passengers die).Nigelb said:
It’s an imperfect analogy - as are pretty well all analogies - since it suggests he’ll die at the end of the process, which obviously isn’t the case. And even on the metaphorical level ignores the fact that those likely to suffer the consequences of the game of chicken are lots of people who are not Dominic Cummings. About whom he doesn’t give two shits.Tabman said:This blog post on Cummings is definitely worth a read. Perhaps someone like @cyclefree can make an article out of it.
It's also crystalised my thinking about the no-deal brinkmanship. Cummings is most definitely driving a Fiat 500 towards a train.
https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/?fbclid=IwAR3eSCo1A_6djhwQc7n59IjiRz6B6jFM65916To8-tYS_4uDtmnN8jmv-Uo
This bit was quite good, though.
As I said: I’m speculating. But it fits my existing mental model of Dominic Cummings, which is that he reads these fascinating, interesting ideas from brilliant people, and takes completely the wrong message from them. For one thing, a key principle of the Rationalist blogosphere that we both admire is the “principle of charity”, the idea that “if you don’t understand how someone could possibly believe something as stupid as they do, that this is more likely a failure of understanding on your part than a failure of reason on theirs”, rather than assuming people are stupid or evil....
But I think the key point remains. The EU will be damaged in a no deal, but not catastrophically so, and is prepared to take the damage to keep the train on the rails than derail it.
I must admit I didn't quite follow the italicised quote point. Is the author saying Cummings doesn't get this point, or does get it?
You’re right about the ‘key point’, but it completely fails to capture the other key point that sustaining damage from a head on confrontation with the EU is simply not a direct concern for Cummings et al. In fact it might have electoral advantages for them, in which case he would see it as something to be desired.
Which certainly would not be true of the Fiat driver.0 -
As you say, parliament has the power to limit the royal prerogative in any way it wishes.Richard_Tyndall said:
The negotiation and execution of treaties is part of the Royal Prerogative. Parliament cannot simply ignore that because it finds it incovenient. If they want to change that they need to introduce primary legislation specifically changing that and removing the Royal Prerogative powers from the Executive. I have long said on here they should do this but until they do they don't get to pick which bits of the constitution they ignore. Remainer arrogance and stupidity keeps plumbing new depths.Chris said:
Interesting concept - a law passed by Parliament being illegal.Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:
I keep thinking we've reached peak Brexiteer stupidity, but no.0 -
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
No, there are a few who wouldn’t, just as there are a few irreconcilables in Parliament, which is I suppose how he justifies his tediously repetitive rhetorical excess.Benpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate...Gallowgate said:
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.HYUFD said:
You certainly cannot reason with diehard Remainer extremists noGallowgate said:
You can’t reason with extremists @bigjohnowls. You should know.bigjohnowls said:
The Survation says 18% want No DealHYUFD said:
That did not have a majority either but then further extension and revoke also failed to get a majority, as I said the only majority was for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, exactly as Boris is aiming forbigjohnowls said:
How many backed No DealHYUFD said:
Corbyn doesn't have the moral authority for further extension which voters opposed 47% to 41% with Survation yesterday.eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:
So bloody obvious, I’ve been saying this ever since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
52% of voters back the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop with a technical alternative as Boris wants in the same poll
Wake up HYUFD
0 -
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.0 -
It's why game theory is an interesting intellectual exercise with applications for, well, games.Nigelb said:
Perhaps I didn’t quote enough of it - he’s saying it’s a principle Cummins seems to ignore (which is not a great surprise).Tabman said:
I don't doubt that Cummings doesn't give two shits (perhaps to extend the metaphor, he has a James Bond style ejector seat to get out of the car before it crashes but all the passengers die).Nigelb said:
It’s an imperfect analogy - as are pretty well all analogies - since it suggests he’ll die at the end of the process, which obviously isn’t the case. And even on the metaphorical level ignores the fact that those likely to suffer the consequences of the game of chicken are lots of people who are not Dominic Cummings. About whom he doesn’t give two shits.Tabman said:This blog post on Cummings is definitely worth a read. Perhaps someone like @cyclefree can make an article out of it.
It's also crystalised my thinking about the no-deal brinkmanship. Cummings is most definitely driving a Fiat 500 towards a train.
https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/?fbclid=IwAR3eSCo1A_6djhwQc7n59IjiRz6B6jFM65916To8-tYS_4uDtmnN8jmv-Uo
This bit was quite good, though.
As I said: I’m speculating. But it fits my existing mental model of Dominic Cummings, which is that he reads these fascinating, interesting ideas from brilliant people, and takes completely the wrong message from them. For one thing, a key principle of the Rationalist blogosphere that we both admire is the “principle of charity”, the idea that “if you don’t understand how someone could possibly believe something as stupid as they do, that this is more likely a failure of understanding on your part than a failure of reason on theirs”, rather than assuming people are stupid or evil....
But I think the key point remains. The EU will be damaged in a no deal, but not catastrophically so, and is prepared to take the damage to keep the train on the rails than derail it.
I must admit I didn't quite follow the italicised quote point. Is the author saying Cummings doesn't get this point, or does get it?
You’re right about the ‘key point’, but it completely fails to capture the other key point that sustaining damage from a head on confrontation with the EU is simply not a direct concern for Cummings et al. In fact it might have electoral advantages for them, in which case he would see it as something to be desired.
Which certainly would not be true of the Fiat driver.
It should never be used in real world situations which have variables.0 -
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
In a die hard extremist conspiracy theory based traitor who could live with thatBeibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.0 -
Total waste of time, he has gone off his rocker completely.OllyT said:
I've given up responding to HYUFD, it's akin to banging your head against a brick wall. I'd give pif I were youGallowgate said:
This is all bollocks @HYUFD. You know it. It doesn’t matter if WA minus backstop has a majority. That’s fine. But that does not in any way logically lead to no deal.HYUFD said:
Extension and revoke do NOT have majority support as Survation showed this weekend.noneoftheabove said:
It is fine for you to believe in unicorn negotiations with the EU and/or to prefer no deal if the unicorn is not found. It is nonsense for you to assign your personal preference of no deal if no unicorn to 17.4 million people despite all evidence to the contrary. No deal does not have majority support.HYUFD said:
The majority of the country oppose both further extension and revoke and Remain with Survation this weekend, I conflate Brexit with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop as 52% of voters want with Survation and as Macron and Merkel did not rule out if Boris offers a technical solution for the Irish border.noneoftheabove said:
1.8% voted for no deal. 40% voted for Corbyns Labour.HYUFD said:
A majority of voters voted for Brexit, a majority have not voted for CorbynScott_P said:
Why do you keep conflating Brexit with no deal? The vast majority of the country can accept Brexit but not no deal. The government is choosing not to deliver it.
If not No Deal it has to be
Only Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop does as Survation also showed, if Boris wins a majority he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop through the Commons, propose a technical solution for the Irish border instead and put the ball in the EU's court. If they refuse No Deal it is.
Even Barnier today said a technical alternative to the backstop could be found once the Withdrawal Agreement is passed through the British Parliament
I will repeat: there is no popular mandate for no deal. This is a fact.0 -
You're only a die hard extremist conspiracy theory based traitor?nichomar said:
In a die hard extremist conspiracy theory based traitor who could live with thatBeibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.
What's wrong with you - toughen up for goodness sake!0 -
What do you think the effect on UK car production and associated industries will be @Alanbrooke ?Alanbrooke said:
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
Who do you think the few on PB are?Nigelb said:
No, there are a few who wouldn’t, just as there are a few irreconcilables in Parliament, which is I suppose how he justifies his tediously repetitive rhetorical excess.Benpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate...Gallowgate said:
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.HYUFD said:
You certainly cannot reason with diehard Remainer extremists noGallowgate said:
You can’t reason with extremists @bigjohnowls. You should know.bigjohnowls said:
The Survation says 18% want No DealHYUFD said:
That did not have a majority either but then further extension and revoke also failed to get a majority, as I said the only majority was for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, exactly as Boris is aiming forbigjohnowls said:
How many backed No DealHYUFD said:
Corbyn doesn't have the moral authority for further extension which voters opposed 47% to 41% with Survation yesterday.eek said:
Boris doesn't have the moral authority for No Deal as all Leave campaigning groups ruled out No Deal...MarqueeMark said:
The House refuses to act on a referendum passed by the voters.Peter_the_Punter said:
The Government refuses to act on a motion passed by the House? Wow!CarlottaVance said:
They pass a motion asking the govt to extend. The govt refuses. Their only remaining option is to VONC the government. Unless they have a PM who can command the house GE Oct 31.Peter_the_Punter said:
Control of the Order Paper? They have time, even if the EU doesn't unilaterally extend.CarlottaVance said:
But how do they force it? Boris Just has to sit on his hands and wait until they VONC him. Then the date is in his gift. He’s never going to agree an extension.AlastairMeeks said:TGOHF said:Lol Labour - “bring it errr off..”
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1168080927685259266?s=21
Is this how A Very British Coup begins?
Boris has the moral authority.
52% of voters back the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop with a technical alternative as Boris wants in the same poll
Wake up HYUFD0 -
we'll continue to produce cars. the biggest impact on the auto sector is the uncertainty round diesels.Benpointer said:
What do you think the effect on UK car production and associated industries will be @Alanbrooke ?Alanbrooke said:
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
I was hoping you wouldn’t put me on the spot like that....Benpointer said:
Who do you think the few on PB are?
If there is no one here who is utterly determined that only Revoke is an acceptable outcome, then I apologise to all and sundry.0 -
Will we produce any significant numbers for export, though, compared to what we did before this year ?Alanbrooke said:
we'll continue to produce cars. the biggest impact on the auto sector is the uncertainty round diesels.Benpointer said:
What do you think the effect on UK car production and associated industries will be @Alanbrooke ?Alanbrooke said:
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
Judging by today’s race so far, Mercedes will have no chance to beat Ferrari at Monza.0
-
who decides if it is illegal, assume it would need to go to court and would be legal until proven not to be?Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:0 -
Leavers, apparently.malcolmg said:
who decides if it is illegal, assume it would need to go to court and would be legal until proven not to be?Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said: 0 -
really that will depend on what HMG does post brexit. With a deal no change, with no deal it will depend on the policies it pursues. It can choose to make manufacturing more attractive in the UK. I hope they do.Nigelb said:
Will we produce any significant numbers for export, though, compared to what we did before this year ?Alanbrooke said:
we'll continue to produce cars. the biggest impact on the auto sector is the uncertainty round diesels.Benpointer said:
What do you think the effect on UK car production and associated industries will be @Alanbrooke ?Alanbrooke said:
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here
Our peak year of production by the way was 19720 -
Lots of people say that. But increasingly it feels that only the extreme positions - No Deal and Revoke - are acceptable to the section of the public who take an interest (60% or so now). People arguing for soft Brexit (from Clarke to Corbyn) are having real trouble getting a hearing at all.Gallowgate said:
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.0 -
Reminds me of the apocryphal story that Porstmouth Poly was going to rename itself the South Hampshire Institute of Technology.eek said:
Oh the City University of Newcastle upon Tyne (as it was almost called).Gallowgate said:
I’m about to go to a former poly after doing my original degree at a redbrick so I will let you know what I think of the differences.FrancisUrquhart said:
This is my general issue with the way university expansion has gone. We have created 130+ universities that in order to become unis (rather than polys / HE facilities) have to had to add a wider range of subjects. The result a dilution at massive cost, and lots and lots of crap degrees.Freggles said:
It's good at a few niche subjects like computer aided animation and more practical things like social work iircFrancisUrquhart said:
They should ask for their money back on the business studies at least...ranked 83 out of 122.Gallowgate said:
It’s good enough for the huge, american conglomerate that I work for to use it for both engineering and business studies/management degrees. It also has a reasonably big International Student population.FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not saying much as it is ranked as one of the worst uni's in the country, albeit still higher than Sunderland.Gallowgate said:
Ironically Teesside University is one of its better current exports.
Very very few old polys have become excellent all round unis.
(Newcastle University and Northumbria University)
0 -
Not quite!jayfdee said:
Were you the only person on board.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I did the train to Heyshamjayfdee said:
Morecambe has undergone a huge redevelopment over recent years and on Sunny week-ends the place is packed out.Recidivist said:
I think you are totally wrong there. I have business in Lancaster from time to time and always stay in a nice bnb in Morecombe. That's a town that has seen better days, but it remains attractive because public money has been spent on the seafront. So visitors, even fleeting ones like me, still turn up and spend money. If it went to wrack and ruin I'd find somewhere else to spend my travelling expenses.Luckyguy1983 said:
Councils seem to do a lot of nice and expensive hard landscaping against a background of empty shops. Putting the cart before the horse it seems to me. Prosperous towns result in public improvements. The opposite is not the case. But I suppose when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.Gardenwalker said:
Quite right.Luckyguy1983 said:
Improved public spaces are great, but they don't often herald a big change in economic fortunes.Gallowgate said:Hartlepool IS reinventing itself. It just takes a long time and a lot of people suffer.
The regeneration around the marina is lovely.
At worst it’s displacement activity.
But local authorities don’t have the power to do much. The very least they should do is to make sure their public spaces are attractive, welcoming guests and safe. Most local authorities even fail at that.
The sea wall has been rebuilt,Midland Hotel re-opened, tatty funfair gone, Eric statue attracts thousands etc.
OK the West end is grim, but the Bare end and Happy mount park are very good, especially as Blobby land was kicked out of the park.0 -
It is much easier for people to make public their support for their first preferences rather than what they would accept. Polling questions, TV, print media, social media all love to show the extremes and ignore the silent middle. We exist, we are just not reflected in the news of whatever format.NickPalmer said:
Lots of people say that. But increasingly it feels that only the extreme positions - No Deal and Revoke - are acceptable to the section of the public who take an interest (60% or so now). People arguing for soft Brexit (from Clarke to Corbyn) are having real trouble getting a hearing at all.Gallowgate said:
I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
Separately, I dont think Corbyn is particularly arguing for soft Brexit, his party is for referendum and remain, and he is for as much damage to the Tories as possible, whether at the expense of the country or not. It seems he would accept any of no deal thru revoke if it meant Labour get a majority. Understandable if cynical, but he has not been very active in pushing for soft Brexit.0 -
"I am an exceptional Remainer, Mrs McClean, and since I’m moving up to revoking, you should be more polite!"Beibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.0 -
Were you the only person on board other than the driver, the conductor, and the ovine mutation returning from a day trip on Grange Fell?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Not quite!jayfdee said:
Were you the only person on board.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I did the train to Heyshamjayfdee said:
Morecambe has undergone a huge redevelopment over recent years and on Sunny week-ends the place is packed out.Recidivist said:
I think you are totally wrong there. I have business in Lancaster from time to time and always stay in a nice bnb in Morecombe. That's a town that has seen better days, but it remains attractive because public money has been spent on the seafront. So visitors, even fleeting ones like me, still turn up and spend money. If it went to wrack and ruin I'd find somewhere else to spend my travelling expenses.Luckyguy1983 said:
Councils seem to do a lot of nice and expensive hard landscaping against a background of empty shops. Putting the cart before the horse it seems to me. Prosperous towns result in public improvements. The opposite is not the case. But I suppose when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.Gardenwalker said:
Quite right.Luckyguy1983 said:
Improved public spaces are great, but they don't often herald a big change in economic fortunes.Gallowgate said:Hartlepool IS reinventing itself. It just takes a long time and a lot of people suffer.
The regeneration around the marina is lovely.
At worst it’s displacement activity.
But local authorities don’t have the power to do much. The very least they should do is to make sure their public spaces are attractive, welcoming guests and safe. Most local authorities even fail at that.
The sea wall has been rebuilt,Midland Hotel re-opened, tatty funfair gone, Eric statue attracts thousands etc.
OK the West end is grim, but the Bare end and Happy mount park are very good, especially as Blobby land was kicked out of the park.0 -
No, there a few "normal" people on board!ydoethur said:
Were you the only person on board other than the driver, the conductor, and the ovine mutation returning from a day trip on Grange Fell?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Not quite!jayfdee said:
Were you the only person on board.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I did the train to Heyshamjayfdee said:
Morecambe has undergone a huge redevelopment over recent years and on Sunny week-ends the place is packed out.Recidivist said:
I think you are totally wrong there. I have business in Lancaster from time to time and always stay in a nice bnb in Morecombe. That's a town that has seen better days, but it remains attractive because public money has been spent on the seafront. So visitors, even fleeting ones like me, still turn up and spend money. If it went to wrack and ruin I'd find somewhere else to spend my travelling expenses.Luckyguy1983 said:
Councils seem to do a lot of nice and expensive hard landscaping against a background of empty shops. Putting the cart before the horse it seems to me. Prosperous towns result in public improvements. The opposite is not the case. But I suppose when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.Gardenwalker said:
Quite right.Luckyguy1983 said:
Improved public spaces are great, but they don't often herald a big change in economic fortunes.Gallowgate said:Hartlepool IS reinventing itself. It just takes a long time and a lot of people suffer.
The regeneration around the marina is lovely.
At worst it’s displacement activity.
But local authorities don’t have the power to do much. The very least they should do is to make sure their public spaces are attractive, welcoming guests and safe. Most local authorities even fail at that.
The sea wall has been rebuilt,Midland Hotel re-opened, tatty funfair gone, Eric statue attracts thousands etc.
OK the West end is grim, but the Bare end and Happy mount park are very good, especially as Blobby land was kicked out of the park.0 -
It’s all kicking off in Northern Israel. Hopefully things will deescalate.0
-
Dr Prasannan! How could you?Sunil_Prasannan said:
"I am an exceptional Remainer, Mrs McClean, and since I’m moving up to revoking, you should be more polite!"Beibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.0 -
Yes indeed. Show some gumption man!!!Benpointer said:
You're only a die hard extremist conspiracy theory based traitor?nichomar said:
In a die hard extremist conspiracy theory based traitor who could live with thatBeibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week.
What's wrong with you - toughen up for goodness sake!0 -
It was just a Die Hard referenceBeibheirli_C said:
Dr Prasannan! How could you?Sunil_Prasannan said:
"I am an exceptional Remainer, Mrs McClean, and since I’m moving up to revoking, you should be more polite!"Beibheirli_C said:
I am a diehard Remainer and I would accept EEA/EFTABenpointer said:
I doubt there are any PB Remainers would wouldn't agree with you there @Gallowgate.Gallowgate said:I’m no diehard Remainer. I would happily accept a Brexit compromise of full and permanent membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.
But no, @HYUFD has to paint us all as diehard Remainers. Although I now see our label has got a bit longer: 'diehard Remainer extremists'. Presumably 'diehard Remainer extremist traitors' and 'marxist diehard Remainer extremist traitors' will be following by the end of the week. 0 -
Interesting lunch with some green activists. Exftinction Rebellion are planning a busy October. All part of the perfect storm developing then in Westminster.0
-
No doubt the risks he was running were adequately reflected in his compensationFrancisUrquhart said:British lawyer for Albanian gangsters is shot three times in the head in execution-style killing after losing a string of high-profile mob cases
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7415279/British-lawyer-Albanian-gangsters-shot-three-times-head-losing-string-cases.html0 -
On first reading, I thought that said "dessicate"....Gallowgate said:It’s all kicking off in Northern Israel. Hopefully things will deescalate.
A solution of sorts I suppose
0 -
I agree that some hedge fund managers will make a killing but I'm pretty sure a consensus will develop as to whether a No Deal Brexit has economically benefitted the nation as a whole or notAlanbrooke said:
as ever that will depend on who you are as to how it will affect you.OllyT said:
I'd be inclined to wait for Cumming's No Deal before concluding whether voters should have been frightened or not.Alanbrooke said:
Leave might have won by more if the government hadnt frightened voters.OllyT said:
Leave won by 3.8% of the vote therefore it is highly likely that both the Turkish Muslim scare poster and the lies on the bus each tipped enough votes to win it for leave. That doesn't mean it motivated every leave voter but it motivated enough to make a difference.Floater said:
You claim to know exactly what drove each leave voters decision?
Some arrogance or delusion on display here0 -
Are you lot still banging on about Brexit? I'm going to Belfast TODAY! On a PLANE! I just had to spend XX quid on hold fees but heck, I'm on holiday. I shall have jolly times. I will regale you with tales of graphs and drinking. (Adopts Hellraiser voice). Oh, but I have such sights to show you....0
-
Labour need to say "This is not the time for electioneering" and go for the moral high ground.dixiedean said:
What if the response is we abstain unless you seek an extension beyond Election Day?numbertwelve said:
Remember that Barclay has already signed the SI's / Acts needed to revoke the UK side of the Treaties. Is anyone willing to bet they would un-revoke them for an election campaign?0 -
But if it is constitutionally legal then the govt do have to, right?Richard_Tyndall said:
If the act passed by Parliament is constitutionally illegal then the Government don't have to follow it. Trouble is Remainers want to pick and choose which bits of the constitution they will follow to suit themselvesBenpointer said:
Right... so I only have to abide by the law if I like the legislation?Scott_P said:0
This discussion has been closed.