Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
I wonder what the approval rate will be when the true unemployment details hit and the queue of people waiting for routine operations on our beloved NHS can be seen from space.
I think the big issue being discussed in the future will be the care homes debacle.
What it suggests to me is that the R number, with which we are all currently obsessed, is largely irrelevant. It is an average for the number of people infected by those currently infected but it is completely misleading. If the research by the Turing Institute is correct many, perhaps most, who have the virus are barely infectious at all, only a risk to those with compromised immune systems and family members where there is prolonged exposure. In contrast, as in the SK nightclub case recently, some people can produce staggering quantities of the virus and infect hundreds of people in a relatively short time. The average between these two, the R number is not particularly meaningful.
What the super spreader hypothesis suggests to me is that very fast testing and indeed the app are going to be critical to coming out of lockdown safely. If a super spreader is active every hour until he or she is traced will cause another wave of infection. It continues to trouble me that the speed of testing and the app are still not available.
We also need to try and find out what makes a super spreader. If they tend to get infected early it might be a reason for the virus "burning out" as those who can spread it more rapidly diminish leaving the rest to spread the virus very slowly, if at all. If we can accelerate this process by identifying super spreaders we could have a major impact on transmission.
You are conflating 'superspreader events' with 'superspreader'.
Popped in to say this. Is it the person or is it the situation?
But it relates to R being estimated to increase across the whole population while so few people have been shown to actually have the disease.
The action that follows is similar- identify the thing responsible for most transmission and work out how to remove it as an issue.
That's the point I was making. In concentrating on the R number we are focusing on a meaningless average instead of what actually makes a difference.
Has anyone noticed any proposals coming in for how to use the £2bn "Active Travel" money announced on May 10th iirc?
Pedals - Nottingham Cycling Campaign - have put forward a good set of ideas.
But I wonder how Mansfield will do with a Council that saw fit to ban cycling in the town centre 24/7 because a couple of kids were cycling inconsiderately one day.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
Given the low percentage of manufacturing in pour economy we have nothing to lose by comprehensively overhauling our manufacturing strategy.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Well the first is impossible unless you start building processor fabrication plants (and the last one of those closed 20 years ago) so the second is a safe better.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
To be fair to the British equivalent of Sinn Fein (the traditional translation.... Ourselves Alone) didn't Nissan announce something like the first of those alternatives recently?
Friend of Israel, a women, Indian, strong on immigration . a Brexit supporter.
Pretty much something for everyone on the left to latch onto there - a prejudice for every day of the week to indulge.
Yes, it's a pity her palpable intellectual inadequacy for high office gives cover for those whose main beef with her is that she's an Indian female authoritarian pro-Israel hard leaver.
What intellectual inadequacy?
She strikes me as quite bright and she had a successful career outside of Parliament before joining it. Not being someone you like doesn't make them intellectually inadequate - I don't like Starmer or his politics but I wouldn't call him an idiot.
I agree she is quite bright but unfortunately she is poor at her job and shows no compassion. She is not an asset to the party in this covid environment
She is quite bright using the general public as a reference. Could hold her own in most settings, no problem. But by the standards of cabinet ministers, especially of holders of the one of the great offices of state, she is extremely poorly equipped up top.
Still, not her fault and not something to blame her for. She was offered the position of Home Secretary by Boris Johnson and one would hardly expect her to say, "No thanks. I'm not clever enough."
She's better than many predecessors in that post.
Will she at the end of her time be deemed by clear consensus to be one of the better Home Secretaries we have had in recent years? That would surprise me, I can't lie, but it's too early to say either way right now.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
Given the low percentage of manufacturing in pour economy we have nothing to lose by comprehensively overhauling our manufacturing strategy.
Our percentage of manufacturing is in line with France ... despite all their obsessions.
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
So just the 850.000 new jobless today, and that is the tip of the iceberg. Mr Sunak is bankrupting the country hiding the truth from us.
Its soon going to be clear that the government's 'new normal' strategy is a completely unsustainable and is in fact causing horrendous and widespread carnage.
There is no new normal. We either go back to the way we were living and accept the risks, or face social and economic disintegration.
That is the choice we face, it always was the choice we faced, and the fact that the pusillanimous west completely ducked that truth will haunt us for a long time.
In the coming weeks the government will be desperately casting around for excuses to junk its disastrous policies as the implications of them begin to bite.
No, we're definitely into a new normal whether you or the government likes it or not. WFH is going to be much more prevalent than it was, people are going to go out to restaurants as a global population less than before even without restrictions on their liberty.
The extent to which our behaviour is modified prior to a vaccine will determine the new baseline r(0) for the virus. Let's call this r(0_new)
Since r(0) x S = 1
That will determine the new endemic steady state of the virus, even if the virus was the same virulence as the common cold with a similar baseline r(0) the endemic steady state susceptible population (S) will be lower due to behavioral changes.
Which brings us back to what every country engaging with the COVID19 problem is trying to do - modify the effective R through behaviour.
The question is - what behaviour modification is required, so that the virus dies out/drops to a background level AND the economy can continue to function. So we can have that nice healthcare. And electricity. And food.
I wonder what the approval rate will be when the true unemployment details hit and the queue of people waiting for routine operations on our beloved NHS can be seen from space.
I think the big issue being discussed in the future will be the care homes debacle.
I disagree. What has happened in care homes is very sad but I would suggest it is more of a commentariat issue because its an easy stick with which to beat the government.
The whole of government and press is largely ignoring the real tragedy that is about to unfold in our country because it does not suit their agenda. The criticism of media and opposition has almost entirely been that the lockdown was not severe enough
So now we have the situation of commentators going ''850,000 more jobless....oh...whatever....now back to that handful of very old folk in care homes''. Naughty government!
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Just an idiot question.
Even EU plants have to import from outside the EU so onshoring everything just isn't a goer. Vehicle manufacturers move parts all the time to suit themselves. and the criteria by which they make those sourcing decisions change frequently. You appear to be stuck in a supply chain circa 2016 which is cast in stone.
Got my Contract Law “eExam” in 15 minutes. Wish me luck!
Break a pen!
I hope he is not using a pen!
Good luck Gallowgate.
Stop reading pb and ace the test. But the broken pen makes me wonder how much spare IT kit people will need to have for WFH, electronic exams, Zoom schools and so on.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Why does it matter?
Why does the entire supply chain need to be onshored, do you not understand manufacturing?
Is it not true today that an automotive component can travel in and out of the UK several times before the vehicle is completed? Does this component not have the potential to attract a tariff at each point of entry and exit to and from the UK?
So just the 850.000 new jobless today, and that is the tip of the iceberg. Mr Sunak is bankrupting the country hiding the truth from us.
Its soon going to be clear that the government's 'new normal' strategy is a completely unsustainable and is in fact causing horrendous and widespread carnage.
There is no new normal. We either go back to the way we were living and accept the risks, or face social and economic disintegration.
That is the choice we face, it always was the choice we faced, and the fact that the pusillanimous west completely ducked that truth will haunt us for a long time.
In the coming weeks the government will be desperately casting around for excuses to junk its disastrous policies as the implications of them begin to bite.
No, we're definitely into a new normal whether you or the government likes it or not. WFH is going to be much more prevalent than it was, people are going to go out to restaurants as a global population less than before even without restrictions on their liberty.
The extent to which our behaviour is modified prior to a vaccine will determine the new baseline r(0) for the virus. Let's call this r(0_new)
Since r(0) x S = 1
That will determine the new endemic steady state of the virus, even if the virus was the same virulence as the common cold with a similar baseline r(0) the endemic steady state susceptible population (S) will be lower due to behavioral changes.
Which brings us back to what every country engaging with the COVID19 problem is trying to do - modify the effective R through behaviour.
The question is - what behaviour modification is required, so that the virus dies out/drops to a background level AND the economy can continue to function. So we can have that nice healthcare. And electricity. And food.
IThe evidence is that for now, those two are not achievable. which do you want?
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
You should have been there at the time of the Coronation! Young, good looking, woman, Naval Officer husband, small family, talking up historic role, new beginning. As I recall it WOW!
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
Given the low percentage of manufacturing in pour economy we have nothing to lose by comprehensively overhauling our manufacturing strategy.
Our percentage of manufacturing is in line with France ... despite all their obsessions.
Its 9% of the economy and shrinking.
We find ourselves much like Germany and Japan in 1945 with a much shrunken base but capable of revival with the right policies We can afford to ditch all that old plant and equipment and gear ourselves up for the next round of manufacturing technologies..
I'm interested in this idea that extended families have to live in one dwelling. They don't.
You can look at immigrant families - thinking back to when I lived in BD7 some time ago Muslim families would live across several small terraced houses, or in one larger terraced house. In student terms these would be 4 bedders or 8 bedders respectively.
Where I am now, I know various families who have moved en bloc to this area - one have come from Somerset way and now parents and both grown up daughters + families are within half a mile or so. Others stay local. That takes a load off services.
Does this have more to do with the idea that the traditional family is in some way made obsolete by all the other kinds that have come along in the last decades, and a perceived need to demolish what is there to make way for the new?
I grew up in the 70s with three generations living in a council semi-detached. It allowed both my parents to go out to work early in the morning whilst my Gran looked after us until my mother came home mid-morning. It enabled my Mum to work, my Gran to do something and keep herself occupied (and meant there were others there to look after her) and we were quite happy. One issue I suspect is taking the kids to school - I walked to school alone as did most of the kids, so there wasn't the need to have someone there by my side, I get the impression these days, that's far less common.
Agree there. It is about living locally, but also about community and promotion of active travel, to use the buzz word.
It also has to do with slightly strategic planning. My nearest academy school with 2500 pupils is on the other side of the A38. 1/3 of the catchment is this side - large 1990s estate with lovely walking / cycling paths mainly (albeit with anti-cycling anti-mobility scooter blocks), and a beautiful bridge across the road. Then a 200m path across a field to the campus back gate - the path is not even surfaced for bike use.
Perhaps 1000 vehicle movements a day could be taken out there, and they are talking about a 10m link road because of congestion near the school gate.
Is it not true today that an automotive component can travel in and out of the UK several times before the vehicle is completed? Does this component not have the potential to attract a tariff at each point of entry and exit to and from the UK?
Why does the entire supply chain need to be onshored
To avoid the barriers we are erecting
Do you understand the thread you are commenting on?
Better than you it seems.
You don't need an entire supply chain to be on shorted "to avoid the barriers". There are some barriers and you deal with them, end of story. Trade goes across barriers every minute of every single day.
What it suggests to me is that the R number, with which we are all currently obsessed, is largely irrelevant. It is an average for the number of people infected by those currently infected but it is completely misleading. If the research by the Turing Institute is correct many, perhaps most, who have the virus are barely infectious at all, only a risk to those with compromised immune systems and family members where there is prolonged exposure. In contrast, as in the SK nightclub case recently, some people can produce staggering quantities of the virus and infect hundreds of people in a relatively short time. The average between these two, the R number is not particularly meaningful.
What the super spreader hypothesis suggests to me is that very fast testing and indeed the app are going to be critical to coming out of lockdown safely. If a super spreader is active every hour until he or she is traced will cause another wave of infection. It continues to trouble me that the speed of testing and the app are still not available.
We also need to try and find out what makes a super spreader. If they tend to get infected early it might be a reason for the virus "burning out" as those who can spread it more rapidly diminish leaving the rest to spread the virus very slowly, if at all. If we can accelerate this process by identifying super spreaders we could have a major impact on transmission.
Its such an odd virus, how can one person be a superspreader such as the waiter in the ski resort blowing a whistle where he infected nearly everyone who was at the party, while others do not seem to spread it at all. There are years of study ahead into how this virus operates.
There has already been a study of "super-spreader events". The common factor is that they are gatherings of people where loud shouting or singing takes place in very close proximity to other people - lots of breath (and virus) being exhaled.
So pubs & discos (yelling your conversation at your mates practically face-to-face), football matches, churches (lots of singing, people close together), networking meetings, etc.
The authors said that the key test was that, to spread the virus efficiently, people needed to be "in each other's faces"
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
I've never recovered from the shock, as a teenager, of seeing how mature adults behaved at a Holyrood garden party.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
I too like the idea of more self-sufficiency. But I'm not sure replacing cheap imports with expensive homegrown goods leads to a sustainable rise in our living standards.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Why does it matter?
Why does the entire supply chain need to be onshored, do you not understand manufacturing?
Is it not true today that an automotive component can travel in and out of the UK several times before the vehicle is completed? Does this component not have the potential to attract a tariff at each point of entry and exit to and from the UK?
I wonder what the approval rate will be when the true unemployment details hit and the queue of people waiting for routine operations on our beloved NHS can be seen from space.
I think the big issue being discussed in the future will be the care homes debacle.
I disagree. What has happened in care homes is very sad but I would suggest it is more of a commentariat issue because its an easy stick with which to beat the government.
The whole of government and press is largely ignoring the real tragedy that is about to unfold in our country because it does not suit their agenda. The criticism of media and opposition has almost entirely been that the lockdown was not severe enough
So now we have the situation of commentators going ''850,000 more jobless....oh...whatever....now back to that handful of very old folk in care homes''. Naughty government!
I probably didn't word that well. I believe it is going to be the issue discussed most regardless of whether it is the most important issue. Having said that I think low tens of thousands is not exactly a handful either.
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
You should have been there at the time of the Coronation! Young, good looking, woman, Naval Officer husband, small family, talking up historic role, new beginning. As I recall it WOW!
Not to lower the tone but well ok if you insist, I believe the Amis - Larkin exchange centred on HMQ being much more sexy than her sister.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
I too like the idea of more self-sufficiency. But I'm not sure replacing cheap imports with expensive homegrown goods leads to a sustainable rise in our living standards.
Agreed.
We may need to produce more, but we don't need to produce absolutely anything and everything. Competitive advantage still exists. We didn't produce everything ourselves even when we were a world-leading manufacturer and nor will we in the future.
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
You should have been there at the time of the Coronation! Young, good looking, woman, Naval Officer husband, small family, talking up historic role, new beginning. As I recall it WOW!
Not to lower the tone but well ok if you insist, I believe the Amis - Larkin exchange centred on HMQ being much more sexy than her sister.
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
Given the low percentage of manufacturing in pour economy we have nothing to lose by comprehensively overhauling our manufacturing strategy.
Our percentage of manufacturing is in line with France ... despite all their obsessions.
Its 9% of the economy and shrinking.
We find ourselves much like Germany and Japan in 1945 with a much shrunken base but capable of revival with the right policies We can afford to ditch all that old plant and equipment and gear ourselves up for the next round of manufacturing technologies..
What Marshall Plan aid is the UK expecting at this stage? The UK Government is now out of tools to really push new industries and letting the old ones die, with the associated costs of unemployment etc. will only exacerbate the problems. The only great leap forward that will come here will resemble the one Mao tried...
Dishwashers (down from 2.7%) Freezers (down from 2.5%) Sanitary products and tampons (down from 6.3%) Paints (down from 6.5%) and screwdrivers (down from 2.7%) Mirrors (down from 4%) Scissors and garden shears (down from 4.7%) Padlocks (down from 2.7%) Cooking products such as baking powder (down from 6.1%), yeast (down from 12%), bay leaves (down from 7%), ground thyme (down from 8.5%) and cocoa powder (down from 8%) Christmas trees (down from 2.5%)
Most of these are easily within the range of currency fluctuation, and of course apply to the delivered cost, not the retail price - so anyone who think's they're going to get fiver off their £200 dishwasher is in for a disappointment. I wish people would stop fetishising "trade deals" and focus more on educating a work force "to make the stuff the world actually wants".
This seems an odd step. As you say these tariffs are not particularly an inhibition to trade but they will certainly be an inhibition to a free trade agreement with the EU. They cannot have a situation where goods that should bear such tariffs can be imported tariff free to the UK and then have free access to the EU. It therefore seems to be a ploy to make a FTA with the EU more difficult at a time when the negotiations are already struggling. Unhelpful.
Quite the opposite - it will make a prompt deal more attractive.
"But tariffs will remain on UK-produced cars - at 10% - and on agricultural products including lamb, beef and butter at their current levels, following concerns that these industries could be decimated by Brexit.
These new tariffs will be applied to trade with any country with which the UK has not negotiated a trade deal by the time the transition period ends on 31 December."
Don't understand the reference to UK-produced cars. If that is supposed to be non UK produced cars we are presumably saying that would apply to EU cars in the absence of a trade deal?
Its badly phrased, whoever wrote that but I understand what they were trying to say.
What they're trying to say is that goods we don't produce (dishwashers etc) are going to be permitted tariff-free, but goods we produce ourselves like cars will see tariffs for that sector.
So we are discouraging the manufacture of dishwashers in this country. Why? We urgently need import substitution to reduce our trade deficit.
Ive been saying that for years
You have indeed. And you are right. We cannot restrict our production to what we produce now. Bluntly, we just don't produce nearly enough to pay for our current standard of living.
Given the low percentage of manufacturing in pour economy we have nothing to lose by comprehensively overhauling our manufacturing strategy.
Our percentage of manufacturing is in line with France ... despite all their obsessions.
Its 9% of the economy and shrinking.
We find ourselves much like Germany and Japan in 1945 with a much shrunken base but capable of revival with the right policies We can afford to ditch all that old plant and equipment and gear ourselves up for the next round of manufacturing technologies..
Green New Deal. Not necessarily Labour's, but the essence of it - the big idea. Tool up to get rich and save the planet.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
You should have been there at the time of the Coronation! Young, good looking, woman, Naval Officer husband, small family, talking up historic role, new beginning. As I recall it WOW!
Not to lower the tone but well ok if you insist, I believe the Amis - Larkin exchange centred on HMQ being much more sexy than her sister.
I know about Larkin's reported off-duty activities, but I didn't realise he went on about sex much in public.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
If you want to "avoid the barriers" you need to "on shore more"...
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
It wasn't and it isn't. I think that opening up more the wider world outside the EU suggests otherwise. No more "Little Europe" :-D .
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
I agree
I had a "debate" recently with a Brexiteer who assured me shipping from Australia was just as easy (cheap?) as shipping from Spain, and in our Globalised World the absolute length of the supply chain was irrelevant.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Why does it matter?
Why does the entire supply chain need to be onshored, do you not understand manufacturing?
Is it not true today that an automotive component can travel in and out of the UK several times before the vehicle is completed? Does this component not have the potential to attract a tariff at each point of entry and exit to and from the UK?
Yes it can. That's not the end of the world.
...but it is a potential impediment to competitive UK manufacture, however you sugar coat it.
What Marshall Plan aid is the UK expecting at this stage? The UK Government is now out of tools to really push new industries and letting the old ones die, with the associated costs of unemployment etc. will only exacerbate the problems. The only great leap forward that will come here will resemble the one Mao tried...
It's Brexit innit? Somefink will turn up. Youll see.....
I 'ad that Boris Johnson in the back of my cab once.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
Wanting a points system to control immigration is not the same as banning immigration completely and evicting non UK citizens from the country
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
I've never recovered from the shock, as a teenager, of seeing how mature adults behaved at a Holyrood garden party.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
If you want to "avoid the barriers" you need to "on shore more"...
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
Then why does the UK want to severe its trading realtionship with its nearest neighbours and pursue new ones with hugely distance ones such as CANZUK, China, Japan and South Korea? Should the UK use clippers to trade with these countries?
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Which will happen first?
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
There aren't that many. And it was recently announced that the Nissan plant would escape closure to be one of the European centres for the worldwide restructuring and consolidation of Renault/Nissan production.
The bigger threat to automotive manufacturing is the likely rapid transition to electric vehicles. For now there don't seem to be any serious plans for mass manufacturing in the UK, while numerous large battery plants are being planned or built in Europe. Had we still been in the EU, we might have landed the Tesla plant now being built in Germany, for example.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
If you want to "avoid the barriers" you need to "on shore more"...
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
Which would tend to make Europe more important to us, not less...
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
As I say, if it makes you feel better please feel free to repeat this as often as you like.
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
I agree
I had a "debate" recently with a Brexiteer who assured me shipping from Australia was just as easy (cheap?) as shipping from Spain, and in our Globalised World the absolute length of the supply chain was irrelevant.
Total bollocks.
Yep - but it demonstrates how hard of thinking most people are. While they can see the fact that the paperwork is the same and the delivery / shipping at this end is the same they miss the fact that something that takes 12 hours to arrive means you need 5 in stock, and something that takes 6 months to arrive means you need 2000 in stock in case.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
If you want to "avoid the barriers" you need to "on shore more"...
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
Which would tend to make Europe more important to us, not less...
In some ways yes, but domestic trumps Europe. As I have regularly pointed out our BOP problem is primarily mid tech items from high cost countries and that is primarily Europe.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
Wanting a points system to control immigration is not the same as banning immigration completely and evicting non UK citizens from the country
It is not you are absolutely right. But that was not the point at hand.
Brexit was won on the desire to have fewer foreigners coming to the UK and, for a subset of Brexiters, to send some of those already here back home.
What Marshall Plan aid is the UK expecting at this stage? The UK Government is now out of tools to really push new industries and letting the old ones die, with the associated costs of unemployment etc. will only exacerbate the problems. The only great leap forward that will come here will resemble the one Mao tried...
It's Brexit innit? Somefink will turn up. Youll see.....
I 'ad that Boris Johnson in the back of my cab once.
(PS - Welcome aboard Mr/Ms ExTory)
Thanks for that Beibheirli, I've been a lurker for over 10 years now and thought I'd join the party rather than shout at the screen any more.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
Patel during the Brexit referendum was not seeking to end immigration. Quite the opposite. Patel said this during the referendum:
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
I've never recovered from the shock, as a teenager, of seeing how mature adults behaved at a Holyrood garden party.
They do say everyone loves a lord.
I never tire of saying - we have acquired (though out the Western World) a new Upper 10,000
"They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords, Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords. They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes; They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies. And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs, Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs."
The old lot at least pretended to have some manners.
The new remind me of Marquis de Maynes is Scaramouche - savagely entitled arrogance and violent anger at the suggestion that they suffer any consequences for their actions.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
Wanting a points system to control immigration is not the same as banning immigration completely and evicting non UK citizens from the country
It is not you are absolutely right. But that was not the point at hand.
Brexit was won on the desire to have fewer foreigners coming to the UK and, for a subset of Brexiters, to send some of those already here back home.
A subset is not central. Thanks for proving my point.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
It wasn't and it isn't. I think that opening up more the wider world outside the EU suggests otherwise. No more "Little Europe" :-D .
Next?
Yes it was. There are plenty of vox-pops about "You never hear an English voice in Tescos" or the old meme of "bl**dy foreigners coming over here and nicking our jobs". There were plenty of interviews of people saying they supported Brexit because of those reasons.
Now... you can argue that the Brexit campaigns never had a line in their manifesto saying "Stop the foreigners, etc" and that may well be the case, but it is really just sophistry. The Brexit campaign knew exactly where to find its support and played to the anti-foreigner gallery which is why it was often dogged during the campaign with claims of attracting racists.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
Patel during the Brexit referendum was not seeking to end immigration. Quite the opposite. Patel said this during the referendum:
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
Perhaps Mr Davies wants to get his car to take him to car import terminals. An ocean of unsold German cars parked up at Killingholme. With a huge spike in work from home, a corresponding spike in unemployment and a rapidly evolving world, does he really think Mercedes are going to order the German government to order the EU to fold to rescue a market which is already far less attractive than it was?
Car makers German or otherwise have problems far larger than Brexit...
So your argument is German manufacturers are struggling so much they're not going to bother if they struggle even more to sell to one of their largest export markets?
Interesting theory.
It's the same logic Brexiteers use to tell us that the catastrophe of a no-deal crash-out wouldn't matter, because we're already reeling from the even worse Covid-19 catastrophe.
What Marshall Plan aid is the UK expecting at this stage? The UK Government is now out of tools to really push new industries and letting the old ones die, with the associated costs of unemployment etc. will only exacerbate the problems. The only great leap forward that will come here will resemble the one Mao tried...
It's Brexit innit? Somefink will turn up. Youll see.....
I 'ad that Boris Johnson in the back of my cab once.
(PS - Welcome aboard Mr/Ms ExTory)
Thanks for that Beibheirli, I've been a lurker for over 10 years now and thought I'd join the party rather than shout at the screen any more.
Welcome. And you might be interested to know that your username has prompted me to examine very carefully my Conservative Party membership, the renewal of which is due this June.
I huffed and puffed when Boris became leader but then I had Jezza as a backstop. The only reason for continuing my membership would be because I think that the economy will be better managed by the Conservatives. That is something I am unsure of atm and of course CV-19 further muddies the water.
I certainly know that the Cons Party is now full of MPs who I have very little in common with ideologically.
It just means we on shore more and fill our supplier factories.
If you want to "avoid the barriers" you need to "on shore more"...
Actually I think the on shore argument will move more on to green footprints and robust supply chains. Shipping things half way around the world is becoming yesterdays idea.
Which would tend to make Europe more important to us, not less...
In some ways yes, but domestic trumps Europe. As I have regularly pointed out our BOP problem is primarily mid tech items from high cost countries and that is primarily Europe.
I don't disagree with you on that - but I see very little evidence indeed that Brexit had or has anything to do with addressing it. And no indication from government that is how they are thinking, either.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
As I say, if it makes you feel better please feel free to repeat this as often as you like.
If it was a central strand of Brexit you should be able to find many Vote Leave spokesmen saying they wanted an end to migration. Go ahead, be my guest and quote them like I just quoted what Patel actually said during the referendum.
If you can't trump my real quote with a real quote of your own then you are lying pure and simple. Real quote please from you or admit you're lying please.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
Patel during the Brexit referendum was not seeking to end immigration. Quite the opposite. Patel said this during the referendum:
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
This is the equivalent of taking your comfort blanket with you in the barrel as you launch yourself over Niagara Falls.
Sunak and Patel's ratings make sense. Johnson's enduring popularity is just a mystery to me - I assume it's some kind of weird English class thing.
Not sure about class, but it’s definitely weird and it’s definitely an English thing.
Yes, a lot of forelock tugging still present south of the border.
How so? People say this but I cannot say I've ever really noticed much respect or deference toward upper class people. I dont rule out the possibility but it feels like one of those certainties that people rarely bother to test or prove.
I don't think it's deference towards poshos so much as being charmed by them; Bertie Woosterism is much more insidious than any allegiance to Debretts.
Of course the inclination of some to turn into slobbering imbeciles in the presence of royalty is something different again.
Hugh Grant probably has a lot to do with it. The Queen is different: she corresponds to some Jungian archetype in the brain of true Englishmen, all of whom dream about having her to tea. It's not about poshness, though: true Englishmen do not have similar but slightly less exciting dreams about Chas n Mills, or any of the Dukes.
You're probably right about the Queen, I remember succumbing to something weird when we were trotted out from our primary school to wave as she passed in an open topped Roller. I was only eight, mind. I think Kingsley Amis referred in one of his letters to Larkin to how often she appeared in his dreams.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
You should have been there at the time of the Coronation! Young, good looking, woman, Naval Officer husband, small family, talking up historic role, new beginning. As I recall it WOW!
She scrubs up nice when played by the wonderful Claire Foy in The Crown. I am pretty sure she's never featured in any of my dreams, though, certainly not in one of *those* kinds of dreams...
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
Patel during the Brexit referendum was not seeking to end immigration. Quite the opposite. Patel said this during the referendum:
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
So fairly exclude the vast majority of those wishing to come here.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
OK, it was THE central strand of Brexit
No. It was nothing. It is a fiction of your imagination.
Philip, I have a list and you're forcing me (against my better instincts) to share. It's of the undeniables that you deny and the untenables that you tenab. Highlights as below (I've left a few out) -
Priti Patel is a social liberal. Boris Johnson did not break his promise for no border in the Irish Sea. Boris Johnson did not send a letter to the EU requesting an extension. The Brexit vote was not one iota about reducing immigration. The level of government debt does not matter if the Cons are in power. Boris Johnson looks like Daniel Craig.
Good news! Your imported dishwasher make 3% more margin for your retailer, and the price is merely the loss of the UK farming industry. Marvellous stuff!
UK farming voted for Brexit.
I voted for Brexit! At no point did I seriously think that would see the UK sail off the edge of the world as we're about to. I have to assume farmers were of a similar mind - free trade without the political union. Why a country who literally ruled the world thanks to free trade wants to do a unique experiment by becoming the only country in the world to stop free trade is beyond me.
I think you had to look at your fellow travellers which would have made it a trivial exercise to work out that it was going to be a shitshow. You and others on this site might have had a noble, sensible, and workable idea of Brexit, but 99.8% of the other Brexiters, and 99.9% of the Brexiters in power, or who were likely to be in power, were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists.
As you are now finding out.
That's just nonsense and beneath you.
The fruitcake, loonies and closet [or even quite open] racists were in the vicious Leave.EU grouping during the referendum.
Vote Leave made sure to do as much as they can to put clear water between the Leave.EU racists etc and themselves - and quite right too.
Tony Blair was prepared to have Jeremy Corbyn as a fellow Labour MP in his government despite knowing what he was. The Brexiteers in Vote Leave were not prepared to share a platform with Farage etc
Oh no! You're off on one of your comic black is white really it is exercises.
So it's a Peoples' Front of Judea thing is it? Vote Leave was chock full of racists while Leave.EU was pure as the driven snow. Or was it the other way round. Would be very interested to see the entry questionnaires for both organisations so that they could filter out the "right" type of leaver for each.
It was quite clearly the other way around.
Leave.EU and UKIP were the ones with bloody disgusting images like "Breaking Point" that were roundly condemned by the Vote Leave campaigners.
There are good and bad people for almost any thinking. Does the fact that there were anti-Semites who voted for Tony Blair's Labour Party make Tony Blair's government and anyone who voted for it anti-Semitic? No, that's preposterous.
A central strand of Tony Blair's Labour Party was not to discourage Jews from coming to the UK.
Exactly - though some Labour voters and even MPs wanted that, just as that was not a central strand of Brexit. Leading Brexiteers of Vote Leave were all welcoming of migration and wanted to encourage the world's best and brightest to be able to come here on an equal footing with people who just happened to hold European citizenship.
A central strand of the Brexit argument was an end to foreigners coming over here. That was overwhelmingly the argument by the leave movement. Just ask our very own @Isam here.
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
You're lying or ignorant, that was never a central strand of Brexit. Find me anything, anything at all, from Vote Leave saying we need an "end to foreigners coming here".
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
Boom! There you go with the black is white argument. Kudos.
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
I often surprise myself by agreeing with Mr T, but on this occasion I have to disagree. There was quite a lot of material about exactly what Ms Patel is talking about; wages being pushed down by 'foreigners' and similar.
Patel during the Brexit referendum was not seeking to end immigration. Quite the opposite. Patel said this during the referendum:
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
This is the equivalent of taking your comfort blanket with you in the barrel as you launch yourself over Niagara Falls.
What, dealing with facts and reality rather than your lies?
Please provide 1 (ONE) real quote saying an end to migration from Vote Leave. Any 1 (ONE) quote would be a starting point. Should be easy for you if it was "a central strand".
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
OK, it was THE central strand of Brexit
No. It was nothing. It is a fiction of your imagination.
Philip, I have a list and you're forcing me (against my better instincts) to share. It's of the undeniables that you deny and the untenables that you tenab. Highlights as below (I've left a few out) -
Priti Patel is a social liberal. Boris Johnson did not break his promise for no border in the Irish Sea. Boris Johnson did not send a letter to the EU requesting an extension. The Brexit vote was not one iota about reducing immigration. The level of government debt does not matter if the Cons are in power. Boris Johnson looks like Daniel Craig.
You're the one who compared Boris Johnson to Daniel Craig, not me. Muppet.
It was never a central strand of Brexit. That is a lie, pure and simple.
OK, it was THE central strand of Brexit
No. It was nothing. It is a fiction of your imagination.
Philip, I have a list and you're forcing me (against my better instincts) to share. It's of the undeniables that you deny and the untenables that you tenab. Highlights as below (I've left a few out) -
Priti Patel is a social liberal. Boris Johnson did not break his promise for no border in the Irish Sea. Boris Johnson did not send a letter to the EU requesting an extension. The Brexit vote was not one iota about reducing immigration. The level of government debt does not matter if the Cons are in power. Boris Johnson looks like Daniel Craig.
This is a bit worrying. Do I have to make a Data Access Request to see your list on me?
ONS weekly death stats out and for the first time the number of deaths citing Covid is materially ahead of the excess death - first signs of crowding out in the reporting.
Comments
Automotive purchasing departments have been doing it for decades.
Good luck Gallowgate.
Break a leg !
A major UK car plant announces onshoring of its entire supply chain?
A major UK car plant shuts down.
Pedals - Nottingham Cycling Campaign - have put forward a good set of ideas.
But I wonder how Mansfield will do with a Council that saw fit to ban cycling in the town centre 24/7 because a couple of kids were cycling inconsiderately one day.
Why does the entire supply chain need to be onshored, do you not understand manufacturing?
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1262667155444830208
Do you understand the thread you are commenting on?
To say "oh but there was a group which welcomed foreigners, what? You didn't hear about them because everyone was focusing on Nigel's totemic poster but you should have been paying more attention" is naive.
You may feel uncomfortable about it - and who could blame you - but the promise to exclude foreigners was central to the Brexit victory and hence is being made good by PP.
You of all people, who was disgusted by Theresa May's purported racism, should be particularly alive to this.
That implies that it's going to be the end of something quite deep seated and profound when HMQ finally goes.
The question is - what behaviour modification is required, so that the virus dies out/drops to a background level AND the economy can continue to function. So we can have that nice healthcare. And electricity. And food.
The whole of government and press is largely ignoring the real tragedy that is about to unfold in our country because it does not suit their agenda. The criticism of media and opposition has almost entirely been that the lockdown was not severe enough
So now we have the situation of commentators going ''850,000 more jobless....oh...whatever....now back to that handful of very old folk in care homes''. Naughty government!
Even EU plants have to import from outside the EU so onshoring everything just isn't a goer. Vehicle manufacturers move parts all the time to suit themselves. and the criteria by which they make those sourcing decisions change frequently. You appear to be stuck in a supply chain circa 2016 which is cast in stone.
https://twitter.com/BBCsarahsmith/status/1262664566640689154?s=20
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1262660625731379200?s=20
Would that the same could be said of some of those replying....
Patel is not seeking to end people coming here either. She's liberalising much of non-EU migration and I welcome that.
@isam was a Leave.EU/Farage/UKIP voter so was part of the ostracised movement that had nothing to do with Vote Leave.
I'll not hold my breath.
We find ourselves much like Germany and Japan in 1945 with a much shrunken base but capable of revival with the right policies We can afford to ditch all that old plant and equipment and gear ourselves up for the next round of manufacturing technologies..
It also has to do with slightly strategic planning. My nearest academy school with 2500 pupils is on the other side of the A38. 1/3 of the catchment is this side - large 1990s estate with lovely walking / cycling paths mainly (albeit with anti-cycling anti-mobility scooter blocks), and a beautiful bridge across the road. Then a 200m path across a field to the campus back gate - the path is not even surfaced for bike use.
Perhaps 1000 vehicle movements a day could be taken out there, and they are talking about a 10m link road because of congestion near the school gate.
And yes
You don't need an entire supply chain to be on shorted "to avoid the barriers". There are some barriers and you deal with them, end of story. Trade goes across barriers every minute of every single day.
So pubs & discos (yelling your conversation at your mates practically face-to-face), football matches, churches (lots of singing, people close together), networking meetings, etc.
The authors said that the key test was that, to spread the virus efficiently, people needed to be "in each other's faces"
We may need to produce more, but we don't need to produce absolutely anything and everything. Competitive advantage still exists. We didn't produce everything ourselves even when we were a world-leading manufacturer and nor will we in the future.
isn't that what politicians are telling us all to do ?
I appreciate we all find different coping strategies for lockdown and yours is to argue persistently, vigorously, and with passion a completely nonsense position presumably to keep your mind sharp for when you go back to work.
But the comment that excluding foreigners "was never a central strand of Brexit" must be put up in the PB Hall of Fame (prop: HYUFD) as a top ten complete load of bollocks, can't fucking believe someone would actually say it comment.
I also appreciate that saying it probably makes you feel better about your decision to hitch your trailer to a racist bandwagon, having been so critical or perceived racism in the Conservative Party previously. But them's the facts.
Next?
I had a "debate" recently with a Brexiteer who assured me shipping from Australia was just as easy (cheap?) as shipping from Spain, and in our Globalised World the absolute length of the supply chain was irrelevant.
Total bollocks.
I 'ad that Boris Johnson in the back of my cab once.
(PS - Welcome aboard Mr/Ms ExTory)
I don't think @Alanbrooke is suggesting the entire supply chain needs to be on shore, even if its good to on shore more.
If the latter, then it tells us very little.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1262628252717387778?s=20
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1262631840143327233?s=20
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1262640116302000128?s=20
And it was recently announced that the Nissan plant would escape closure to be one of the European centres for the worldwide restructuring and consolidation of Renault/Nissan production.
The bigger threat to automotive manufacturing is the likely rapid transition to electric vehicles. For now there don't seem to be any serious plans for mass manufacturing in the UK, while numerous large battery plants are being planned or built in Europe.
Had we still been in the EU, we might have landed the Tesla plant now being built in Germany, for example.
Brexit was won on the desire to have fewer foreigners coming to the UK and, for a subset of Brexiters, to send some of those already here back home.
I know that many members of the Indian diaspora find it deeply unfair that other EU nationals effectively get special treatment. This can and will change if Britain leaves the EU. A vote to leave the EU is a vote to bring back control over immigration policy to the UK. This will mean that we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly. Ending unrestricted immigration from the EU means we can have a better immigration system.
Please explain how you think saying "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly" means "we want to end immigration".
Do you agree or disagree with the aim that "we can have a strong and robust immigration system that lets the brightest and the best in from around the world and treats people more fairly"?
"They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs."
The old lot at least pretended to have some manners.
The new remind me of Marquis de Maynes is Scaramouche - savagely entitled arrogance and violent anger at the suggestion that they suffer any consequences for their actions.
Now... you can argue that the Brexit campaigns never had a line in their manifesto saying "Stop the foreigners, etc" and that may well be the case, but it is really just sophistry. The Brexit campaign knew exactly where to find its support and played to the anti-foreigner gallery which is why it was often dogged during the campaign with claims of attracting racists.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants
Do you think people voted on the poster or vague comments about "fair this" and "robust that"?
I huffed and puffed when Boris became leader but then I had Jezza as a backstop. The only reason for continuing my membership would be because I think that the economy will be better managed by the Conservatives. That is something I am unsure of atm and of course CV-19 further muddies the water.
I certainly know that the Cons Party is now full of MPs who I have very little in common with ideologically.
If you can't trump my real quote with a real quote of your own then you are lying pure and simple. Real quote please from you or admit you're lying please.
Priti Patel is a social liberal.
Boris Johnson did not break his promise for no border in the Irish Sea.
Boris Johnson did not send a letter to the EU requesting an extension.
The Brexit vote was not one iota about reducing immigration.
The level of government debt does not matter if the Cons are in power.
Boris Johnson looks like Daniel Craig.
Please provide 1 (ONE) real quote saying an end to migration from Vote Leave. Any 1 (ONE) quote would be a starting point. Should be easy for you if it was "a central strand".
Do I even want to??