“You know, racism, institutionally racism has existed, and no matter who was in charge, and the party will be found to be institutionally racist, so we may as well just accept that point now, the party will be found to be institutionally racist, what we have to do is live with it”
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
It's going to be a volatile period and that narrative isn't set in stone. Imagine if we get a Black Wednesday-style Sterling crisis, and it turns out that the Eurozone is actually a safe harbour.
We got a Black Wednesday crisis as we were in the ERM
Because the government was trying to buck the market without enough firepower.
No, as tieing our currencies to the rest of Europe's means we cannot take the fiscal action we need, see Germany, Italy and Greece, the latter have to follow the former who run the Eurozone effectively
Though the people of Greece and Italy actually rather like a currency that doesn't shrink in their pockets every day.
They just need to have governments who understand a stable currency has different properties.
If inflation was a way to grow an economy then Venezuela and Zimbabwe would be the sites of unimaginable wealth, and Germany and Switzerland impoverished backwaters.
Its not a case of all or nothing.
A freely floating exchange rate acts as a natural stabiliser and shock absorber so that the currency reacts and takes spreading out much of the shock rather than the economy having to take on the entire burden.
Having shock absorbers like that doesn't make you Venezuela or Zimbabwe.
can you give some examples of countries that have inflated themselves to riches by debasing their currency?
Indeed Mrs Thatcher was very keen (perhaps too keen) on squeezing inflation out of the economy, as a foundation for growth.
Inflation is like an alcoholic having an eye opener to cure his hangover. A temporary relief, followed by increased misery. Currency debasement is addictive, it does not create the conditions for sustainable growth, it postpones them.
Couldnt the same be said for the decade of ultra low interest rates?
The notion of mass testing and tracking outbreaks looks a feasible response and signs from Germany suggest a premature easing might cause problems.
I don't think the signs from Germany do suggest that. I am prepared to be corrected on the latest figures, but I haven't yet seen any figures that say that the German R0 rate is estimated to have gone back above 1. As of yesterday the 7 day case average was still trending strongly down.
Nonetheless, Merkel has every reason to preach caution because the last thing her government wants is for the Germans to start to drop social distancing out of complacency. So we do need to take her warnings with a pinch of salt, and see them at least in part as efforts to harden the resolve of the German people.
Our Government is meanwhile citing the situation in Germany as a reason why we can't yet ease the lockdown here. That's a convenient crutch for them, so they're content to latch on to Merkel's warnings verbatim as an excuse for the status quo. I think the real reason why they feel (correctly) that they can't yet ease the lockdown here is because our numbers are still several times the magnitude of those in Germany and won't get down to their levels for some weeks yet. The volumes involved mean that they cant expect tracing to be fully effective when starting from such a high base.
Obviously it would be embarrasing to admit that we're so far out of line still, and that that's the reason why we just have to watch enviously as other countries take tentative steps back to normality.
The crucial parameter when deciding whether or not to ease the restrictions should be the R0 factor. It needs to be so far below 1 that the uptick from easing restrictions doesn't catapult you back into exponential growth territory.
The most interesting soundbite from Mr Johnson's comeback presser was his estimate that the UK's R0 was "between 0.6 and 0.9". Over the last week the UK has reported almost 40k new cases.
The RKI has verbally communicated (but not yet officially published) R0 moving between 0.75 and 1.0. Reported new infections ca. 10k.
Something doesn't add up there.
It's quite likely that if the UK had tested 100,000 people per day at the start of April we would have had 40k positive results. That's the difference, the UK is starting from a high base, much higher than Germany because our horrible and late start. Germany shut down public events in a much more timely manner and generally took the situation seriously. The UK government allowed Cheltenham to go ahead and football matches. That's the disaster we're currently paying for. On the scale Germany is second only to Korea in terms of the quality of response to the virus. The UK is near the bottom of the league with Italy, Spain and the US.
Certainly mistakes were made in the fog of war metaphor. All nations have done, apart perhaps Taiwan and South Korea.
What we really need though is a plan of what to do with that testing capacity.
Who will we test, and how often? Who will do the contact tracing? How will we prevent positive tests from spreading the virus?
Testing is a nessecary step in controlling the disease, but is not an end in itself.
I refer you to yesterday's post, testing can form the major part of a funnel strategy to test, track, trace and separate. You can skip the middle two steps until we figure out how and still have a huge effect on bring down the R to well below where it is now by removing virus carrying people from the general population until they have recovered and are no longer infectious. If we were following steps 1 and 4 we could potentially prevent today's 6k positive results from causing another 10k infections assuming an R of 0.7 currently.
John Snow took the handle off the Broad St Pump to break a Cholera epidemic, before Pasteur described bacteria. Breaking transmissuion can take place well before the science is fully worked out. If we find that Churches and pubs are foci of transmission, but small shops are not, for example, we have a way forward.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
He didn't say it so far tonight, but give it a few Rioja filled hours in boring Primrose Hill.
The predictions of EU dissolution have been going on for at least as long as the predictions of the SNP being kicked out of the honeymoon suite.
The EU isn't going to dissolve, its just going to be a backwards warped union with impoverished elements because they are not the same and one answer doesn't work for all.
You of all people should be able to understand that logic.
My starting point is the ability to let us choose for ourselves, on which basis the EU has the UK beaten into a cocked hat.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
Trouble with big bazookas is that they tend to be very floppy and difficult to control.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
He didn't say it so far tonight, but give it a few Rioja filled hours in boring Primrose Hill.
The predictions of EU dissolution have been going on for at least as long as the predictions of the SNP being kicked out of the honeymoon suite.
The EU isn't going to dissolve, its just going to be a backwards warped union with impoverished elements because they are not the same and one answer doesn't work for all.
You of all people should be able to understand that logic.
My starting point is the ability to let us choose for ourselves, on which basis the EU has the UK beaten into a cocked hat.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
It's going to be a volatile period and that narrative isn't set in stone. Imagine if we get a Black Wednesday-style Sterling crisis, and it turns out that the Eurozone is actually a safe harbour.
We got a Black Wednesday crisis as we were in the ERM
Because the government was trying to buck the market without enough firepower.
No, as tieing our currencies to the rest of Europe's means we cannot take the fiscal action we need, see Germany, Italy and Greece, the latter have to follow the former who run the Eurozone effectively
Though the people of Greece and Italy actually rather like a currency that doesn't shrink in their pockets every day.
They just need to have governments who understand a stable currency has different properties.
If inflation was a way to grow an economy then Venezuela and Zimbabwe would be the sites of unimaginable wealth, and Germany and Switzerland impoverished backwaters.
Its not a case of all or nothing.
A freely floating exchange rate acts as a natural stabiliser and shock absorber so that the currency reacts and takes spreading out much of the shock rather than the economy having to take on the entire burden.
Having shock absorbers like that doesn't make you Venezuela or Zimbabwe.
can you give some examples of countries that have inflated themselves to riches by debasing their currency?
Indeed Mrs Thatcher was very keen (perhaps too keen) on squeezing inflation out of the economy, as a foundation for growth.
Inflation is like an alcoholic having an eye opener to cure his hangover. A temporary relief, followed by increased misery. Currency debasement is addictive, it does not create the conditions for sustainable growth, it postpones them.
Couldnt the same be said for the decade of ultra low interest rates?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
What percentage of GDP did the Bank of Zimbabwe do?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
He didn't say it so far tonight, but give it a few Rioja filled hours in boring Primrose Hill.
The predictions of EU dissolution have been going on for at least as long as the predictions of the SNP being kicked out of the honeymoon suite.
The EU isn't going to dissolve, its just going to be a backwards warped union with impoverished elements because they are not the same and one answer doesn't work for all.
You of all people should be able to understand that logic.
My starting point is the ability to let us choose for ourselves, on which basis the EU has the UK beaten into a cocked hat.
What's wrong with independence?
What's wrong with letting voters choose for themselves?
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
He didn't say it so far tonight, but give it a few Rioja filled hours in boring Primrose Hill.
The predictions of EU dissolution have been going on for at least as long as the predictions of the SNP being kicked out of the honeymoon suite.
The EU isn't going to dissolve, its just going to be a backwards warped union with impoverished elements because they are not the same and one answer doesn't work for all.
You of all people should be able to understand that logic.
My starting point is the ability to let us choose for ourselves, on which basis the EU has the UK beaten into a cocked hat.
What's wrong with independence?
What's wrong with letting voters choose for themselves?
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
What percentage of GDP did the Bank of Zimbabwe do?
Talk about step change lol. Honestly you're not stupid enough to think that's going to happen so I'm not going to waste any time to explain why. Just admit that the eurozone situation is currently suboptimal and we can all get back to drinking.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
Both.
Clever.
Its the truth.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
As of now: Swedish death rate (per capita) = 6.5 times Norway/Finnland; 3.5 times Denmark
Flying Colours?
True but countries need an exit strategy don't forget. Lockdown untilit goes away is not a strategy. I won't be coming to a verdict on who has/hasn't got this right for a long time to come.
If I were in charge of the stats, in order to keep the "proportion of positive tests" meaningful I think I would have preferred the daily testing number to be "test results recorded today" rather than tests physically performed or dispensed. But that's not specifically about today (though this has highlighted the issue) and some kind of distortion will have occurred at all periods when the testing capacity was being expanded rapidly. I would also have wanted to sepatate the results by pillar, would have been rather more useful for end users I suspect.
Test results by pillar are available - see link for today's announcement:
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
€750bn is seen as the extent of what the ECB can get away with without Northern Europe screaming bloody murder. There's a few other odds and sods like cutting the overnight deposit rate but that's all in the margins.
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
Both.
Clever.
Its the truth.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
Remind me, cos I have had a couple of glasses of rather nice reisling, of the countries that have serially debased their currencies and inflated themselves wealthy?
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
Remind me, cos I have had a couple of glasses of rather nice reisling, of the countries that have serially debased their currencies and inflated themselves wealthy?
When the time was right? Sure.
The United Kingdom The United States of America Italy [in the past] Netherlands [in the past] France [in the past] Japan
And many, many more. An independently-operating Central Bank does not make you Zimbabwe.
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
Yes, the absolute numbers of Germans shot down didn't matter. Ultimately the Battle of Britain was won by us having more fighters in the air at the end than the beginning. We kept our R number above 1 in a battle of attrition.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
€750bn is seen as the extent of what the ECB can get away with without Northern Europe screaming bloody murder. There's a few other odds and sods like cutting the overnight deposit rate but that's all in the margins.
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
750 Bn will not be the end of it, I think that much is certain.
The ECB was a little late, that's a given, but where has that caused harm?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
€750bn is seen as the extent of what the ECB can get away with without Northern Europe screaming bloody murder. There's a few other odds and sods like cutting the overnight deposit rate but that's all in the margins.
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
750 Bn will not be the end of it, I think that much is certain.
The ECB was a little late, that's a given, but where has that caused harm?
Spain, Italy etc
Do you not understand the concept that one size does not fit all?
Its like saying that a marathon runner and a sedentary person in isolation need the same amount of calories.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has given emergency approval for the drug remdesivir to be used as a coronavirus treatment, US President Donald Trump has said.
Trump said that the CEO of Gilead, which developed the drug, had described the move as an important first step and would donate one million vials of remdesivir.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
Both.
Clever.
Its the truth.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
I think that's a bit optimistic. Germany and the Netherlands will need about as much 'more money' as anybody else.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
Both.
Clever.
Its the truth.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
I think that's a bit optimistic. Germany and the Netherlands will need about as much 'more money' as anybody else.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
Both.
Clever.
Its the truth.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
I think that's a bit optimistic. Germany and the Netherlands will need about as much 'more money' as anybody else.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
On the contrary. England isn’t going anywhere. Much as you may want it to.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
Remind me, cos I have had a couple of glasses of rather nice reisling, of the countries that have serially debased their currencies and inflated themselves wealthy?
When the time was right? Sure.
The United Kingdom The United States of America Italy [in the past] Netherlands [in the past] France [in the past] Japan
And many, many more. An independently-operating Central Bank does not make you Zimbabwe.
There are certain times that devaluation is inevitable and beneficial, such as Britain coming off the Gold Standard in the 1930s, but that was part of a wider economic programme of structural change.
The remaining times that we did through the postwar period led to growth substantially below our peers, because there was little structural reform.
The problem of Italy in particular (Greece and Spain were growing again pre Covid-19) is the absence of real structural reform. Until they face that, inflation is just an alcoholic reaching for the whisky again.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I've yet to see a supporter of Scottish sovereignty say they would want to veto England rejoining the European Union.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I've yet to see a supporter of Scottish sovereignty say they would want to veto England rejoining the European Union.
Let me introduce you to Malc sometime. They would. 100% they would.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
€750bn is seen as the extent of what the ECB can get away with without Northern Europe screaming bloody murder. There's a few other odds and sods like cutting the overnight deposit rate but that's all in the margins.
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
750 Bn will not be the end of it, I think that much is certain.
The ECB was a little late, that's a given, but where has that caused harm?
Yes and no, I think the rest needs to come from a fiscal response. As I said, lots of people think the ECB has run out of firepower, it's ready for negative rates that aren't helping.
Were you not there for the sovereign debt crisis? The whole thing was because Trichet refused to print money.
If I were in charge of the stats, in order to keep the "proportion of positive tests" meaningful I think I would have preferred the daily testing number to be "test results recorded today" rather than tests physically performed or dispensed. But that's not specifically about today (though this has highlighted the issue) and some kind of distortion will have occurred at all periods when the testing capacity was being expanded rapidly. I would also have wanted to sepatate the results by pillar, would have been rather more useful for end users I suspect.
Test results by pillar are available - see link for today's announcement:
Thanks for that! What I meant was that the headline figure that aggregates them all probably isn't very meaningful since it contains a mix of "apples and oranges" and that the headline figure should arguably be Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 results separately rather than relegating them to the detailed results release, but I suppose the press would quite likely have just added the two together in their reports anyway..
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I've yet to see a supporter of Scottish sovereignty say they would want to veto England rejoining the European Union.
To be fair, it would be a very different England to take that step, and one much more congenial to our Scottish and Irish neighbours. At least a decade away imo.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
That’s not the point I’m making. The isolation of the England is something to be desired in north of the border, which suggests it is possible, if only in your own discourse.
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
It was nevertheless inaccurate. The RAF Fighter Command reported that they shot down 2,692 German aircraft in the Battle of Britain, nearly twice as many as the Germans lost, including losses from flak and accidents.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I've yet to see a supporter of Scottish sovereignty say they would want to veto England rejoining the European Union.
To be fair, it would be a very different England to take that step, and one much more congenial to our Scottish and Irish neighbours. At least a decade away imo.
The most congenial England to our Irish and Scots neighbours would be one that had been sunk into the sea with extreme prejudice.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
It doesn't actually. The Bank has done 10% of GDP, the ECB has done about 6% of GDP, it also has to buy according to a set of odd rules that the Bank doesn't need to bother with.
Why has the ECB done less, so far? Because it couldn't do more, or because it hadn't to? And what is better?
€750bn is seen as the extent of what the ECB can get away with without Northern Europe screaming bloody murder. There's a few other odds and sods like cutting the overnight deposit rate but that's all in the margins.
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
750 Bn will not be the end of it, I think that much is certain.
The ECB was a little late, that's a given, but where has that caused harm?
Yes and no, I think the rest needs to come from a fiscal response. As I said, lots of people think the ECB has run out of firepower, it's ready for negative rates that aren't helping.
Were you not there for the sovereign debt crisis? The whole thing was because Trichet refused to print money.
Yes, I was, but, in my view, these are entirely different circumstances.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
That’s not the point I’m making. The isolation of the England is something to be desired in north of the border, which suggests it is possible, if only in your own discourse.
I'm afraid I don't really understand what you're talking about. You seem to be (somewhat incoherently) conflating what England has chosen of its own volition with what you think I want.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
I've yet to see a supporter of Scottish sovereignty say they would want to veto England rejoining the European Union.
To be fair, it would be a very different England to take that step, and one much more congenial to our Scottish and Irish neighbours. At least a decade away imo.
The most congenial England to our Irish and Scots neighbours would be one that had been sunk into the sea with extreme prejudice.
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
That’s not the point I’m making. The isolation of the England is something to be desired in north of the border, which suggests it is possible, if only in your own discourse.
I'm afraid I don't really understand what you're talking about. You seem to be (somewhat incoherently) conflating what England has chosen of its own volition with what you think I want.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. What it seems you want is a Scotland free of the influence of us “arseholes” south of the border. That does not chime with your point about interdependence . If England rejoined the EU the arseholes would have seats on the Commission, MEPs etc which would have a direct influence on Scotland. So as it distances England from Scotland Brexit must be in the interests of Independent Scotland - otherwise the English would have influence in Scottish affairs. Interdependence means some influence of England and the English in Scotland - an outcome to be avoided, no?
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
It was nevertheless inaccurate. The RAF Fighter Command reported that they shot down 2,692 German aircraft in the Battle of Britain, nearly twice as many as the Germans lost, including losses from flak and accidents.
Over claiming is/was a problem for all services and all countries.
The most ludicrous were the Japanese who routinely multiplied the front line reports to make the results more paletable to their superiors.
Good journalism from BBC outlining how poorer neighbourhoods experience higher risks of COVID 19. Perhaps the government should actively mitigate these risks.
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
It was nevertheless inaccurate. The RAF Fighter Command reported that they shot down 2,692 German aircraft in the Battle of Britain, nearly twice as many as the Germans lost, including losses from flak and accidents.
Over claiming is/was a problem for all services and all countries.
The most ludicrous were the Japanese who routinely multiplied the front line reports to make the results more paletable to their superiors.
And early example of the problems caused by targeting ... ?
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
I can't really be arsed with the tedious 'but that's not real independence' shite, however we live in an interdependent word and it's really down to the people of a country to choose the type and level of interdependence they want; there's no such thing as the splendid isolation independence that burns in the fever dreams of Farage (which curiously seems to involve getting up the arse of Trump).
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
Given your desire to have nothing whatsoever to do with your reviled nearest neighbour doesn’t that rather count against the idea that isolation is impossible? You want to cut all ties with rUK - how does that chime with interdependence given you will be cutting a relatively small island in two without any such interdependence?
Arseholes don't last forever, much as it may seem like it.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
Assume that was intended as a rhetorical question.
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
It was nevertheless inaccurate. The RAF Fighter Command reported that they shot down 2,692 German aircraft in the Battle of Britain, nearly twice as many as the Germans lost, including losses from flak and accidents.
That is not the same thing. Several pilots shooting at the same aircraft and claiming a kill or half-kill will inevitably overestimate the number of downed planes. The point is that we had a far more reliable method available which was to simply count the number of crashed planes. The Nazis could not do this, although they would of course know accurately their own losses.
Good journalism from BBC outlining how poorer neighbourhoods experience higher risks of COVID 19. Perhaps the government should actively mitigate these risks.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think of any better way to celebrate when we finally stagger, exhausted, miserable and quite possibly bankrupt, to the end of the Covid Ultramarathon than to hold another constitutional referendum followed by another immensely complex divorce process lasting until the late 2020s. It'll be so much fun.
The fact that it's pound for pound probably the stupidest SLab (ex) pol putting it out there is possibly less comforting.
At some point (presumably as late as possible) Sturgeon is going to have to level with her activists and supporters, and admit that indy is off the table for the foreseeable future.
In a world struggling through a Great Depression, and with countries running 10% deficits (what will Scotland's be, 20%?!) no nation could take the insane leap in the dark that is independence - especially without a currency or a central bank. Immediate bankruptcy would ensue.
Sturgeon knows this, smarter Nats know it, but her party will hate it.
That's when the impressive SNP hegemony might finally fall apart.
Maybe correct, but maybe not. The CV damage provides HMG with a convenient carpet to sweep the Brexit damage underneath. But isn't the same true for Scindy? Quite a lot of the secession damage could be swept under the exact same carpet, couldn't it?
Yes, a possibility. I considered it. But unlikely.
The difference is that Brexit has been voted for, and passed and is now a legal reality. The last push over the line just happens to coincide with corona, which helps Hard Brexiteers.
To reach indy the Scottish government has to win the next election (v probable, of course) call a new referendum and then win the following three-six month long campaign, when all these problems will be vigorously aired.
I can't see a route to victory. Voters will recoil from the extra chaos.
There is a further complication for Nats: the state of the EU (the presumed destination for indyScot). The EU is going to be in turmoil for half a decade now. Riven with debt and distrust. It won't look half so inviting.
Sturgeon must know all this, so her tricky job is to keep the Nats in power without ever reaching for her stated goal.
So you think the state of the UK will be more inviting, not in turmoil, not debt ridden, no distrust?
Er, yeah. Clearly.
You do understand what is about to hit the EU, don't you, Matthias?
Doom, I tell ya, doom. Italy might leave, Poland and Hungary, too. And then the EU will crumble, surely.
Hungary is actually quite possible, once Eastern Europe realises that the good times are over, and no more money is coming from Brussels.
Yes, of course. Poland and Italy, too. But will that mean the end of the EU? I don't think so.
I never said it would be, did I?
It sounded a bit like that. So what is "going to hit the EU"? Rising debt and an amount of turmoil? Yes, but that's true for the whole world, isn't it?
Our debt will be illusory as I explained earlier today. Is it really debt if you pay no interest?
Unless the Bank of England funds 100% of it, there will need to be some price discovery.
The Bank of England doesn't need to fund 100% of it, just not 0% will help wonders.
The Bank of England can do what we need it to do. The European nations lack the firepower we have with an independent Central Bank.
The ECB has bigger bazookas than the Bank of England.
What it seems you want is a Scotland free of the influence of us “arseholes” south of the border.
'I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour'
As I said, incoherent.
Unless you're part of the current regime enacting Brexit, C- for comprehension.
The point I am making is that the interdependence suggests that there is some influence over a Scotland by your southern neighbour. That is an anathema to the nationalist cause. Similarly it is bizarre to regret Brexit as it would mean English influence (in the form of MEPs and Commissioners) in Scottish political affairs. Independence + Brexit means you are free of any influence on you by the English. Which is why I fail to understand the Irish and Scots nationalist hostility to the historic enemy leaving the EU.
Incidentally the destruction of the Zimbabwean dollar really start due to an unexpected occurance (a military intervention in another country in Zimbabwes case - the second Congo war)
It is rather reminiscent of the much exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe planes shot down during the Battle of Britain.
Just on that narrow point, we knew almost to the plane how many Luftwaffe aircraft were shot down because the battle was fought in the skies above Britain so it was a simple matter of counting the wrecks when they hit the ground in Kent. It was the Nazis who overestimated how many RAF fighters they'd destroyed because they could only use the less reliable metric of asking the pilots, so if two or three pilots claimed the same victim, and to be fair, they had all been shooting at it when it went down, overestimates were inevitable.
The daily tally of RAF 'kills' as announced over the BBC proved to be much exaggerated when the final figures emerged.
Indeed. The main problem was multiple pilots claiming every kill.
I don't think in the end it was a "problem".
It was nevertheless inaccurate. The RAF Fighter Command reported that they shot down 2,692 German aircraft in the Battle of Britain, nearly twice as many as the Germans lost, including losses from flak and accidents.
That is not the same thing. Several pilots shooting at the same aircraft and claiming a kill or half-kill will inevitably overestimate the number of downed planes. The point is that we had a far more reliable method available which was to simply count the number of crashed planes. The Nazis could not do this, although they would of course know accurately their own losses.
In other words, Fighter Command & HMG were happy to have the inflated figure for public consumption.
What it seems you want is a Scotland free of the influence of us “arseholes” south of the border.
'I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour'
As I said, incoherent.
Unless you're part of the current regime enacting Brexit, C- for comprehension.
The point I am making is that the interdependence suggests that there is some influence over a Scotland by your southern neighbour. That is an anathema to the nationalist cause. Similarly it is bizarre to regret Brexit as it would mean English influence (in the form of MEPs and Commissioners) in Scottish political affairs. Independence + Brexit means you are free of any influence on you by the English. Which is why I fail to understand the Irish and Scots nationalist hostility to the historic enemy leaving the EU.
I regret England wanting a reactionary and regressive Brexit but in the end that's up to them, or more specifically you. I just don't want to be dragged down with it.
What it seems you want is a Scotland free of the influence of us “arseholes” south of the border.
'I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour'
As I said, incoherent.
Unless you're part of the current regime enacting Brexit, C- for comprehension.
The point I am making is that the interdependence suggests that there is some influence over a Scotland by your southern neighbour. That is an anathema to the nationalist cause. Similarly it is bizarre to regret Brexit as it would mean English influence (in the form of MEPs and Commissioners) in Scottish political affairs. Independence + Brexit means you are free of any influence on you by the English. Which is why I fail to understand the Irish and Scots nationalist hostility to the historic enemy leaving the EU.
I regret England wanting a reactionary and regressive Brexit but in the end that's up to them, or more specifically you. I just don't want to be dragged down with it.
Understandable. Brexit has the benefit of no English influence on an EU that Scotland joins in the future. An EU with an Englishman/woman on the Commission and English MEPs would mean the influence of English lawmakers in Scotland. Or am I missing something?
What it seems you want is a Scotland free of the influence of us “arseholes” south of the border.
'I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour'
As I said, incoherent.
Unless you're part of the current regime enacting Brexit, C- for comprehension.
The point I am making is that the interdependence suggests that there is some influence over a Scotland by your southern neighbour. That is an anathema to the nationalist cause. Similarly it is bizarre to regret Brexit as it would mean English influence (in the form of MEPs and Commissioners) in Scottish political affairs. Independence + Brexit means you are free of any influence on you by the English. Which is why I fail to understand the Irish and Scots nationalist hostility to the historic enemy leaving the EU.
I regret England wanting a reactionary and regressive Brexit but in the end that's up to them, or more specifically you. I just don't want to be dragged down with it.
Understandable. Brexit has the benefit of no English influence on an EU that Scotland joins in the future. An EU with an Englishman/woman on the Commission and English MEPs would mean the influence of English lawmakers in Scotland. Or am I missing something?
I'd be perfectly fine with English commissioners. You really have to get away from this ethnic thing you've got going on.
Comments
“You know, racism, institutionally racism has existed, and no matter who was in charge, and the party will be found to be institutionally racist, so we may as well just accept that point now, the party will be found to be institutionally racist, what we have to do is live with it”
Nothing to see here - nope nothing at all
Nothing, I 100% support it. I think you'd be better off being independent, I've made that clear, but I think your compatriots need to choose that for themselves.
Now since I've answered your question can you answer mine? What's wrong with independence.
Spain, Italy etc needed more.
Netherlands, Germany etc did not.
Now we have deja vu all over again. One size does not fit all. Not then and not now.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public#number-of-cases-and-deaths
One of the issues is actually that many believe the ECB is a spent force because it's easing programme went on for far too long. While the US (and even the UK) were tightening the ECB was still easing.
Much like our virus response, the ECB banking crisis response was too late so it had to go on for too long. The UK and US started earlier so were able to finish earlier.
It's 3rd August 1989 on BBC4 TOTP.
I also find the example of the arseholes who seem to have taken control of the reins of our nearest Brexiting neighbour...unappealing. I'd go some way to avoid the possibility of that happening here.
.
The United Kingdom
The United States of America
Italy [in the past]
Netherlands [in the past]
France [in the past]
Japan
And many, many more. An independently-operating Central Bank does not make you Zimbabwe.
The ECB was a little late, that's a given, but where has that caused harm?
Do you not understand the concept that one size does not fit all?
Its like saying that a marathon runner and a sedentary person in isolation need the same amount of calories.
Trump said that the CEO of Gilead, which developed the drug, had described the move as an important first step and would donate one million vials of remdesivir.
In any case, which is better, lighter touch interdependence with 27 other countries or a 'heavier' interdependence with 1?
The remaining times that we did through the postwar period led to growth substantially below our peers, because there was little structural reform.
The problem of Italy in particular (Greece and Spain were growing again pre Covid-19) is the absence of real structural reform. Until they face that, inflation is just an alcoholic reaching for the whisky again.
Were you not there for the sovereign debt crisis? The whole thing was because Trichet refused to print money.
That's another remarkable coincidence. Why would it?
She's endorsed Biden!
Might go back in.
Mad.
The most ludicrous were the Japanese who routinely multiplied the front line reports to make the results more paletable to their superiors.
He fought the case and won!
As I said, incoherent.
Unless you're part of the current regime enacting Brexit, C- for comprehension.
(New thread, btw.)
I would really recommend this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Money-Destroys-Nations-Philip-Haslam-ebook/dp/B00NOXX3JA
When Money Destroys Nations
Incidentally the destruction of the Zimbabwean dollar really start due to an unexpected occurance (a military intervention in another country in Zimbabwes case - the second Congo war)
You really have to get away from this ethnic thing you've got going on.