OT my pension statement landed on the doormat yesterday. In the past year, my pot's value has dropped 10 per cent as share prices have fallen, and thanks to inflation, what remains has less purchasing power. This is bad news considering I have no income since being made redundant, and am burning my way through savings.
Respectful of the will of the British people and of Brexit... Heh. Yes, Brexit was indeed a British choice.
The problem with disavowing the Northern Ireland Protocol is that while it might play well in the Express, it basically pisses off everyone else and makes the UK look ever more like a dodgy dealer.
Many will say so what, but the practical impact is the EU cannot trust the UK to maintain the integrity of the single market.
A solution to Northern Ireland is not possible with Boris Johnson in power, he simply cannot be trusted.
The problem with that is all the opponents of Boris Johnson have bet the house on the sanctity of "peace in Northern Ireland" and "the Good Friday Agreement".
All Boris has to do is turn it around now and say that he is putting the Good Friday Agreement first, and with one bound he is free.
So long as he doesn't build a land border, what's the problem? There were three things that had to be achieved - get out of the EU, no sea border, no land border. Two are done already, we're out of the EU and there's no land border - if he unilaterally drops t he sea border while neither rejoining the EU nor building a land border then the so-called 🦄 is suddenly in existance.
Once the unicorn is real, then what do the people betting the house on the Good Friday Agreement do next? You can't say that Britain needs to build a sea border as not doing so is a unicorn, when not doing so is already the status quo. You can't say we need to be in the EU, when we're already not. You can't say we aren't allowed to build a land border, when we're saying we're not doing so anyway.
So once the unicorn is alive and visible to all, then what do you do next? How do you slay the unicorn?
You lift sanctions on Russia and put them on the UK?
Because… reasons…
What sanctions? Sanctions wasn't in my comment whatsoever. 😕
There's no serious threat to sanctions to the UK at all. For one thing the EU isn't willing to build a hard border in Ireland, so can't implement sanctions, and for another the mercantilists in Germany won't put up with any actually happening anyway.
Volkswagen is already saying trade needs to be normalised with Russia despite the war and Germany is busy trying to find ways to circumvent the sanctions. German car manufactures aren't willing to put up for long with sanctions on Russia, they're not going to put up with sanctions on Britain at all and never would have been. Its always been a hollow threat from day one and serious people realised that.
Business is clear that we have imposed trade sanctions on ourselves. A one-way GB-only cost that our competitors abroad do not suffer. I know you think that us paying more to trade is a cost to the people we trade with, but as your opinion and reality are a long way apart that doesn't matter.
Anyway, the real elephant in the room in the "Oh no our oven ready deal tastes awful" NI row is that all of the reasons they are giving for why we need to remove the TCA apply just as much to all trade with the EU. They are describing all of the down sides they have imposed. Seemingly because they are too stupid to read a deal and understand it.
Yesterday: Elon Musk: Announces he's voting Republican and to expect political attacks against him in retribution All Normal People: I wonder what awful story he's already been contacted about and is coming out tomorrow that he's trying to distract from
Today: Space X paid quarter million in Hush Money for Musk showing his dick and propositioning an employee. Weird Musk Nerds: OMG, Musk was right, look how quickly the smear stories have started!
I love the fact that Musk tries to make himself the victim: "Look, they're attacking me for my shitty behaviour!"
Musk is a sh*t. He has been a sh*t for years. You can admire some of the things he has done whilst calling out the sh*t stuff. And there comes a time when every fanboi has to ask themselves whether the sh*ttiness has reached such a level that they should no longer hero-worship him.
OT my pension statement landed on the doormat yesterday. In the past year, my pot's value has dropped 10 per cent as share prices have fallen, and thanks to inflation, what remains has less purchasing power. This is bad news considering I have no income since being made redundant, and am burning my way through savings.
Sounds awful - and this is the shared reality for a lot of people. Yet according to the remaining Bonzo the Clown advocates these people who are clearly impoverished and feeling the squeeze will once again vote for the party wot did this to them.
The fact that she keeps referring to the "Good Friday Accords" just shows how detached she is from the details. She's just signalling for domestic reasons.
Believe you are seriously understimating committment of Pelosi and other Democrats - especially politicos like her and Biden who were players in Congress during the Clinton administration when the Good Friday deal went down. And millions more who were keen observers. Not all of whom were Democrats, insiders and onlookers.
Bringing peace - or reasonable semblence thereof - to Ireland was THE marquee foreign policy achievement of the Clinton presidency. It is NOT just some damn political talking point. We regard it as a human victory, a moral imperative.
Which YOUR goverment has endangered & undermined, with about as much forethought let alone foresight as a blind dog pisses on handy lamp-post.
Oh cut the virtue signalling bullshit.
Brexit doesn't endanger peace in Northern Ireland and it doesn't require a sea border.
If the UK invokes Article 16, which it is perfectly legally entitled to do under international law, and tears up the 'sea border' and doesn't impose any land checks then how exactly is peace in NI threatened?
If there's no land border, no sea border, and we're not in the EU - the so-called unicorn - then how does that threaten peace?
And if peace still exists and the "unicorn" exists post-Article 16 then what is America going to do about it? Are Pelosi and Biden going to try to slay 'the unicorn' and insist upon border checks where none are happening and so jeopardise peace in Northern Ireland? I don't think so.
I'm busy today as I was yesterday so won't be hanging round on here to bother pulling your posts aparts.
Do you understand the difference between what you think should happen and reality?
"Brexit doesn't endanger peace in NI" when it has literally and demonstrably done that is HY levels of delusion.
"If the UK invokes Article 16" is not the end of the process where you then insist we just "walk away". We can invoke A16 but in the real world will then need to propose alternatives which are acceptable to all sides. As all sides including our own say. You disagree, but you aren't involved so who cares?
I hope that you won't be too angry when the absolutes you describe turn out to be imaginary.
No you are categorically wrong, we don't need to propose alternatives which are acceptable to all sides. We need to unilaterally act and implement unilateral safeguards then the unilateral safeguards remain the answer until they're either accepted by all sides, or an alternative is found that is acceptable to all sides.
So we just implement what is suitable to us and propose that or similar as the acceptable solution, then let the EU come to us with an alternative which is acceptable to us, or we leave our solution in place.
See this explanatory flow chart. Nowhere does it say that we must satisfy them. Instead what it says is "Safeguard measures retained" or "Agreed solution found" are the only two steps at the bottom. Our own safeguard measures being kept is fine for us, and an agreed solution (my preferred long-term solution) that is agreeable to us, is also fine for us. So where is the problem for us?
On the other hand if the EU want the safeguards removed rather than being extended every three months (see loop back at bottom) they need find a solution that satisfies us. Otherwise we keep the safeguards, which we're content with and they're not.
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
If she was his student, it would be different: but according to the article, she was a researcher and had her own lab.
Both were in breach of the rules. However, it was decided that she was the victim and he was the perpetrator, because of gender and comparative seniority. The article just describes the process by which this occurred, there is no reason to believe it is factually inaccurate, it is written by a credible and respected journalist.
As I said, people have a tendency to overlook difficult problems by appeals to 'complexity' and 'two sides'.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Having sex with one’s postdoc, i.e. one staff member in a relationship with another, wouldn’t get you fired. A line manager in a relationship with whom they line manage raises HR concerns, but is not forbidden. One would, I presume, be expected to report the relationship up the chain of command and arrange new line management arrangements. A relationship with one’s student is a different matter.
BBC: a third of all Scottish rail services will be removed from the timetables, starting on Monday. Talks between the rail unions and the Scottish government have failed to find a solution to their various disagreements.
Good old tories, sunny uplands ahead
??? It's nationalised by SG, so Greens/SNP.
"Temporary", apparently.
Never mind. They can go by the alternative ferry service.
The fact that she keeps referring to the "Good Friday Accords" just shows how detached she is from the details. She's just signalling for domestic reasons.
Believe you are seriously understimating committment of Pelosi and other Democrats - especially politicos like her and Biden who were players in Congress during the Clinton administration when the Good Friday deal went down. And millions more who were keen observers. Not all of whom were Democrats, insiders and onlookers.
Bringing peace - or reasonable semblence thereof - to Ireland was THE marquee foreign policy achievement of the Clinton presidency. It is NOT just some damn political talking point. We regard it as a human victory, a moral imperative.
Which YOUR goverment has endangered & undermined, with about as much forethought let alone foresight as a blind dog pisses on handy lamp-post.
Oh cut the virtue signalling bullshit.
Brexit doesn't endanger peace in Northern Ireland and it doesn't require a sea border.
If the UK invokes Article 16, which it is perfectly legally entitled to do under international law, and tears up the 'sea border' and doesn't impose any land checks then how exactly is peace in NI threatened?
If there's no land border, no sea border, and we're not in the EU - the so-called unicorn - then how does that threaten peace?
And if peace still exists and the "unicorn" exists post-Article 16 then what is America going to do about it? Are Pelosi and Biden going to try to slay 'the unicorn' and insist upon border checks where none are happening and so jeopardise peace in Northern Ireland? I don't think so.
I'm busy today as I was yesterday so won't be hanging round on here to bother pulling your posts aparts.
Do you understand the difference between what you think should happen and reality?
"Brexit doesn't endanger peace in NI" when it has literally and demonstrably done that is HY levels of delusion.
"If the UK invokes Article 16" is not the end of the process where you then insist we just "walk away". We can invoke A16 but in the real world will then need to propose alternatives which are acceptable to all sides. As all sides including our own say. You disagree, but you aren't involved so who cares?
I hope that you won't be too angry when the absolutes you describe turn out to be imaginary.
No you are categorically wrong, we don't need to propose alternatives which are acceptable to all sides. We need to unilaterally act and implement unilateral safeguards then the unilateral safeguards remain the answer until they're either accepted by all sides, or an alternative is found that is acceptable to all sides.
So we just implement what is suitable to us and propose that or similar as the acceptable solution, then let the EU come to us with an alternative which is acceptable to us, or we leave our solution in place.
See this explanatory flow chart. Nowhere does it say that we must satisfy them. Instead what it says is "Safeguard measures retained" or "Agreed solution found" are the only two steps at the bottom. Our own safeguard measures being kept is fine for us, and an agreed solution (my preferred long-term solution) that is agreeable to us, is also fine for us. So where is the problem for us?
On the other hand if the EU want the safeguards removed rather than being extended every three months (see loop back at bottom) they need find a solution that satisfies us. Otherwise we keep the safeguards, which we're content with and they're not.
This is as dumb as Tories posting screengrabs of guidelines saying "this proves Starmer broke the law". The part your blinkervision is missing is "Party B may respond with rebalancing measures".
You think "We trigger A16, we do what we like, the EU do nothing, we win". In the real world, the impact of the rebalancing measures is why the government are all mouth and no trousers over their threats...
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Having sex with one’s postdoc, i.e. one staff member in a relationship with another, wouldn’t get you fired. A line manager in a relationship with whom they line manage raises HR concerns, but is not forbidden. One would, I presume, be expected to report the relationship up the chain of command and arrange new line management arrangements. A relationship with one’s student is a different matter.
In Sabatini’s case… well, he’s in a different country with different attitudes to employment law. It’s much easier to sack people in the US. The article is clearly written from a pro-Sabatini position. What is alleged about Sabatini was more than that he had a relationship with a junior staff member. darkage’s initial summary of the article was incomplete.
Well nothing will happen with NIP until next year and chances are she won't even be Speaker after November, so...
As the tweet and responses point out, there is bipartisan opposition to any trade deal with the UK if it continues along its course.
But we know we aren’t getting a trade deal with the US anyway. So that’s a useful non-threat they can happily make and we can ignore.
That’s fine but it was a key part of the Brexit economic case, such as it was.
The ability to make deals was a key part of the Brexit economic case, not making a deal explicitly and solely with the USA.
Since we already have some deals and talks are quite advanced already on the CPTPP which would trump them all, that's a key part that is still going strong.
Its worth remembering that if Britain joins the CPTPP then that would be a bigger trade zone than the European Union - as well as a faster growing one.
What's the growth rate of CPTPP counries?
Fast but (even speaking as a Brexit supporter glad of his vote) not as relevant because of distance. It’s really useful, but not a complete game changer. We will still always want to trade some things closer to home.
I was also interested in the baseline.
Every time I get paid my bank balance's "growth" for that day is faster than Jeff Bezos's growth rate. But only an idiot would think I was catching him up.
The dirty secret about economic growth is that it's easier to achieve when you're poorer because of the slipstream effect. Hitching your wagon to growing markets makes a lot of superficial sense, but by the time the market has grown to be comparable to what's on your doorstep, isn't it going to be levelling off to a more "Western" growth rate?
The problem is that the EU is poorer too and isn't growing.
Since 1992 when the EU replaced the EEC, the EU has been growing slower than most of the rest of the developed world and is falling backwards not going forwards.
GDP per capita in the Republic of Korea is not just growing faster by far than GDP per capita in the Eurozone, but its been catching up and will probably overtake either this year or in the next couple of years.
As for your comment about South Korea, why are you suddenly cherry picking a country that's outside both the EU and CPTPP? Don't do a HYUFD on me, you are way better than that.
The EU absolutely is "poorer". In the 1980s despite being a lot smaller then prior to multiple expansions it was in a famous speech by Margaret Thatcher a trade zone "bigger than the United States". Its not anymore though, despite the fact the EU has expanded repeatedly and the USA hasn't yet added a new State a lot smaller than the USA. Indeed it had already fallen a long way behind before we left too.
US GDP per capita $63k Euro Area GDP per capita $35k
As for why I gave the example of Korea, the conversation expanded from CPTPP to Asia in general, and whether nations there are growing just due to the "slipstream" effect so I used them as an example, because they're coincidentally at the crossover point. Their GDP per capita is $34k versus $35k in the Euro Area, so if there were just a "slipstream" effect then that should be clearly visible by now and their growth should have halted over the past decade, but it hasn't.
Oh and Korea has followed the UK in announcing it is seeking accession to the CPTPP.
The EU is relatively poorer. It is a large developed country, with a low population growth rate. (The same, of course, can be said of Japan.)
It (and Japan) has still got absolutely richer in the last few decades - just less quickly than younger or poorer countries.
That said, I suspect South Korea (and Taiwan) have now reached levels where their economic growth is going to slow sharply. Demographic headwinds mean that they will need to spend ever increasing portions of their earnings in looking after old people. They - basically - are the next Japan or Italy.
That's an interesting thought, someone mentioned earlier their distaste at seeing old people working in the USA, but could the fact that people do continue working much more over there be a factor in why American growth has so vastly exceeded European growth in the past few decades?
They have a much higher birthrate and much higher immigration too.
What is interesting is that Germany was higher in 1992 than the USA, although the two had often been around the same level.
That isn't the case anymore. As I said since the EU came into existence in 1992, the EU has been falling further and further behind.
Oh and I checked @Farooq 's data where he said the EU had grown an average of 2% since 1980. That average is accurate, but the EU didn't exist for the period 1980-1992.
Actually the EEC grew in the period 1980 to 1991 by well over 2% but since 1992 well under 2% has been achieved, and since the turn of the century its more like 1.5% (even excluding 2020 due to the pandemic).
The EU has not succeeded in any measurable metric. People should be asking themselves why the EU is failing, not why we are leaving it.
That number swings around a lot with currencies, though. If you look at EUR-USD, it's been as low as 0.8, and as high as 1.3 (maybe more).
Much of the recent outperformance has been currency related, and you can see that by overlaying the UK on there:
Basically, if the USD is strong, the US powers ahead. If it is weak, everyone else catches up.
Ah, but look at the UK graph in your link and see how it follows America's upward trend until the GFC drop but never recovers under Conservative rule. Our steepest upward curves seem to have been under Labour governments, even in the 1970s.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
We must hope but as well as Ukraine bear in mind sanctions against Russia which is, in normal times, a major exporter of hard and soft commodities, and China's Covid-related shutdowns.
OT my pension statement landed on the doormat yesterday. In the past year, my pot's value has dropped 10 per cent as share prices have fallen, and thanks to inflation, what remains has less purchasing power. This is bad news considering I have no income since being made redundant, and am burning my way through savings.
Not good; at least one of my pensions is pretty well unchanged this year. Fortunately the NHS and State ones have risen a little. And one way and another we're not driving as much, so that's a saving.
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Knouse wasn’t Sabatini’s student. She was a colleague - the head of another lab - who didn’t work with him directly
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Having sex with one’s postdoc, i.e. one staff member in a relationship with another, wouldn’t get you fired. A line manager in a relationship with whom they line manage raises HR concerns, but is not forbidden. One would, I presume, be expected to report the relationship up the chain of command and arrange new line management arrangements. A relationship with one’s student is a different matter.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
I don't have a robust understanding of macroeconomics, but this an unusual situation where a big chunk of the population saved lots of money during the pandemic as there were no opportunities for discretionary spending.
So, despite prices increasing dramatically, people who saved a lot are still going out for dinner, driving at the weekends and so on, and pushing prices even higher. This completely fucks those who didn't have the cash to save in the first place.
Given the BoE is not raising interest rates to dampen this all down, it's up to Sunak to come after those of us who saved loads during the pandemic and transfer it to those getting screwed.
Comments
Anyway, the real elephant in the room in the "Oh no our oven ready deal tastes awful" NI row is that all of the reasons they are giving for why we need to remove the TCA apply just as much to all trade with the EU. They are describing all of the down sides they have imposed. Seemingly because they are too stupid to read a deal and understand it.
This cabinet? Stupid? Who knew? https://twitter.com/bmay/status/1527307489993183232
Musk is a sh*t. He has been a sh*t for years. You can admire some of the things he has done whilst calling out the sh*t stuff. And there comes a time when every fanboi has to ask themselves whether the sh*ttiness has reached such a level that they should no longer hero-worship him.
So we just implement what is suitable to us and propose that or similar as the acceptable solution, then let the EU come to us with an alternative which is acceptable to us, or we leave our solution in place.
See this explanatory flow chart. Nowhere does it say that we must satisfy them. Instead what it says is "Safeguard measures retained" or "Agreed solution found" are the only two steps at the bottom. Our own safeguard measures being kept is fine for us, and an agreed solution (my preferred long-term solution) that is agreeable to us, is also fine for us. So where is the problem for us?
On the other hand if the EU want the safeguards removed rather than being extended every three months (see loop back at bottom) they need find a solution that satisfies us. Otherwise we keep the safeguards, which we're content with and they're not.
Both were in breach of the rules. However, it was decided that she was the victim and he was the perpetrator, because of gender and comparative seniority. The article just describes the process by which this occurred, there is no reason to believe it is factually inaccurate, it is written by a credible and respected journalist.
As I said, people have a tendency to overlook difficult problems by appeals to 'complexity' and 'two sides'.
Mr. JohnL, sorry to hear that.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
Here’s my university’s policy on such matters: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/human-resources/personal-relationships-policy
You think "We trigger A16, we do what we like, the EU do nothing, we win". In the real world, the impact of the rebalancing measures is why the government are all mouth and no trousers over their threats...
And one way and another we're not driving as much, so that's a saving.
So, despite prices increasing dramatically, people who saved a lot are still going out for dinner, driving at the weekends and so on, and pushing prices even higher. This completely fucks those who didn't have the cash to save in the first place.
Given the BoE is not raising interest rates to dampen this all down, it's up to Sunak to come after those of us who saved loads during the pandemic and transfer it to those getting screwed.