Roger The Pope is a total tool..anyone who tells millions of very poor people to keep on producing more kids..to starve or be deprived for all of their miserable lives is not fit to be head of anything..let alone a powerful religious organisation
I had high hopes for this Pope. He was the first in a long time that I, as an atheist, thought really understood the problems of the world and had some answers as to how to deal with them. Unfortunately his stands against homosexuality and contraception have undermined any claim he could make to be in any way progressive.
I think that's a bit harsh. The pope has tried hard to move the Catholic church on from a blanket condemnation of gay men and lesbians and towards accepting people into the church for all their perceived faults. One of his first pronouncements as pope was to say "who am I to judge gay people?". It's generally thought that he would like to go further than he has but that he does not have the necessary support within the Vatican to do so.
On condoms, the pope has only today advised that it was proper for women to use condoms to avoid Zika virus. This seems like a huge step to me.
How can you be harsh in condemning a man that accepts a role which says he is infallible. He's almost literally asserting that he has some hotline to a divine being. His position is based on a complete lie. Now that doesn't make the good things that he says wrong, but it does entirely diminish the degree to which we should doff our caps.
Popes very rarely claim infallibility. Popes mostly come and go without ever issuing a doctrinal proclamation under the banner of infallibility.
Roger The Pope is a total tool..anyone who tells millions of very poor people to keep on producing more kids..to starve or be deprived for all of their miserable lives is not fit to be head of anything..let alone a powerful religious organisation
I had high hopes for this Pope. He was the first in a long time that I, as an atheist, thought really understood the problems of the world and had some answers as to how to deal with them. Unfortunately his stands against homosexuality and contraception have undermined any claim he could make to be in any way progressive.
I think that's a bit harsh. The pope has tried hard to move the Catholic church on from a blanket condemnation of gay men and lesbians and towards accepting people into the church for all their perceived faults. One of his first pronouncements as pope was to say "who am I to judge gay people?". It's generally thought that he would like to go further than he has but that he does not have the necessary support within the Vatican to do so.
On condoms, the pope has only today advised that it was proper for women to use condoms to avoid Zika virus. This seems like a huge step to me.
How can you be harsh in condemning a man that accepts a role which says he is infallible. He's almost literally asserting that he has some hotline to a divine being. His position is based on a complete lie. Now that doesn't make the good things that he says wrong, but it does entirely diminish the degree to which we should doff our caps.
If you're interested a very good program on Radio 4 about the ex Pope's letters to a female friend over several decades and their relationship.
No I don't have it the wrong way round. There is a huge rulebook for trading european shares. We helped to draft it and we follow it. It might, for example, say that shares of Deutsche Telecom can only be traded by people called Hans. It would be ridiculous, but if JP Morgan in London wanted to trade Deutsche Telecom, they would need to hire some bloke called Hans to do it. At present we have an input into such rules.
The single rulebook (optional for non eurozone members according to the draft) governs amongst other things SSM, SRM which, as non-euro members, we remain out of. CRD-IV governs capital requirements as you say and, like the Basel protocols, are sensible measures ensuring uniformity of risk across financial and credit institutions. Are you really so worried about the right level CARs to the extent that you would vote Leave for the BoE to set our own?
To say "we can regulate our own banks" is, as they say, not even wrong. Of course we govern our own banks and the EU accepts this.
As to your last statement, how long this will be the case if we vote to stay in remains to be seen. I think you are seriously underestimating the hostility towards the City from the EU.
And I understand that concern. It is a known unknown.
Look, @Richard_Tyndall asked for a positive reason to stay in the EU. I think that MiFID and its formulation is onesuch. It would be the infamous government by fax.
Is it enough to convince Leavers to stay? Of course not. But it is a concrete example, in an industry important to the UK, where staying in would go some way to avoiding the extra cost and almost certain disadvantages being imposed upon The City.
MiFiD is a disaster (my first job was working for Kay Swinburne's boss...let me just say I am not surprised).
There will be an attempt to take down the City soon after we vote to stay in. We've seen it in clearing, we've seen it in FFT, we've seen it in compensation policies that *increase* rather than reduce structural risk.
It will happen either way. Inside we have to accept the rules. Outside we can innovate around them. The Eurodollar market is significant in that respect. Fundamentally, though, there are few businesses that we want to be in that the EU can prevent us being in if we are independent.
Thanks Charles, I value your opinion on this. Did you hear Laura Sandys on LBC circa 530pm today? She made a big play about how well the EC was doing in opening the services market and that it would lead to a massive growth of business for UK companies especially in financial services.
TGOHF The Pope should attend a screening of Spotlight...let him see how corrupt his organisation really is
I think you miss the point. Trump like most Americans parades his Christianity like a medal. The Pope is simply using his authority to call his bullshit for what it is. Bravo to the Pope. We could do with more like him.
Thanks to Martin Luther originally, and Henry VIII (settled by Elizabeth I) in this country, I can be a Christian and not take a blind bit of notice of what the Pope says or does.
Henry VIII was not entirely anti-Europe though: he did once run to be President of the European Council (or a forerunner of it) in 1519:
Peston on ITV stated just now that the EC have said to Cameron that there will be no coming back for a second deal if this one fails in the referendum. Peston said that Cameron welcomes that. Brinkmanship.
That is just a bit of wishful thinking by Richard North. It doesn't actually detract from the main thrust of the piece explaining how Norway in EFTA (as an example) has more influence over new legislation than the UK does inside the EU.
Yes, I see the mechanism in principle. It seems a fairly obscure one, but maybe he is right. If it's valid as an approach (and I don't know enough about it to say), then it's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping would be developed as a coherent alternative to EU membership.
I haven't a clue whether or not Trump is a Christian, and judge that it has no bearing on his suitability for office.
What the Pope said was far more nuanced than the headline, in any case.
"I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt," the Pope said.
I haven't a clue whether or not Trump is a Christian, and judge that it has no bearing on his suitability for office.
He claims to be. The BBC shows him wafting the bible his mother gave him. So he thinks its important. I find it barely credible that people are surprised that the pope (or any cleric) says he prefers building bridges to building walls. From what I have seem Trumps response was crass even by his standards.
I haven't a clue whether or not Trump is a Christian, and judge that it has no bearing on his suitability for office.
Ha. I would judge likewise but I fear we are out of step with the US electorate on that.
As it happens, I think the sort of blue collar white voters that favour Trump are moderately religious without being especially devout, and I doubt if they'd take much notice of the Pope, on political matters
I haven't a clue whether or not Trump is a Christian, and judge that it has no bearing on his suitability for office.
What the Pope said was far more nuanced than the headline, in any case.
"I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt," the Pope said.
I thought that might be the case. Everything is always more nuanced than the headline. Well, not quite always.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Interesting piece on BBC London right now conducting Vox Pops asking if people know what the EU referendum is about, what Cameron is renegotiating and about the emergency brake.
48/60 did know what the referendum was about but very few knew any of the detail.
I haven't a clue whether or not Trump is a Christian, and judge that it has no bearing on his suitability for office.
Ha. I would judge likewise but I fear we are out of step with the US electorate on that.
As it happens, I think the sort of blue collar white voters that favour Trump are moderately religious without being especially devout, and I doubt if they'd take much notice o the Pope.
Yes, probably. What I meant was that I think you still need to be some kind of Theist of a vaguely Abrahamic sort to be elected President. Christian of any flavour, Mormon (I don't think that was Romney's problem), Jew would probably do fine. Muslim ... who could possibly have an issue with that?
An openly atheist President is, I think, not currently possible.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
I would strongly recommend looking at this piece by Richard North on UNECE and how it works in comparison to the EU. This is the sort of international co-operation we should be looking at - by mutual consent rather than dictat.
Surely the problem, though, is in the last paragraph? It's not in the UK's power to make that happen.
That is just a bit of wishful thinking by Richard North. It doesn't actually detract from the main thrust of the piece explaining how Norway in EFTA (as an example) has more influence over new legislation than the UK does inside the EU.
Britain in EFTA is a totally different animal than the piddling countries there now. But I do not have a great issue with Britain being in EFTA/EEA. But I know its not much different than where we are now. As long as we were to stay out of Schengen. So I am not greatly excited about Leave. But to avoid the political EU that's were we might end one day.
You keep repeating this 'no difference' line and it is of course utter rubbish. The vast majority of EU law today is outside of the Single Market rules and we would be able to return to making our own legislation to suit our own needs on all those areas. To say that it would make no difference is bizarre in the face of the facts.
That is just a bit of wishful thinking by Richard North. It doesn't actually detract from the main thrust of the piece explaining how Norway in EFTA (as an example) has more influence over new legislation than the UK does inside the EU.
Yes, I see the mechanism in principle. It seems a fairly obscure one, but maybe he is right. If it's valid as an approach (and I don't know enough about it to say), then it's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping would be developed as a coherent alternative to EU membership.
The important point being this mechanism, obscure or not, is already in place. We already sit on these bodies, we just have no say on them and unlike Norway we are forced to adopt the legislation even if we disagree with it. The difference if we left would be that we would have a vote in our own right and would not be forced to automatically adopt legislation and standards we disagreed with.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
I would strongly recommend looking at this piece by Richard North on UNECE and how it works in comparison to the EU. This is the sort of international co-operation we should be looking at - by mutual consent rather than dictat.
Surely the problem, though, is in the last paragraph? It's not in the UK's power to make that happen.
That is just a bit of wishful thinking by Richard North. It doesn't actually detract from the main thrust of the piece explaining how Norway in EFTA (as an example) has more influence over new legislation than the UK does inside the EU.
Britain in EFTA is a totally different animal than the piddling countries there now. But I do not have a great issue with Britain being in EFTA/EEA. But I know its not much different than where we are now. As long as we were to stay out of Schengen. So I am not greatly excited about Leave. But to avoid the political EU that's were we might end one day.
You keep repeating this 'no difference' line and it is of course utter rubbish. The vast majority of EU law today is outside of the Single Market rules and we would be able to return to making our own legislation to suit our own needs on all those areas. To say that it would make no difference is bizarre in the face of the facts.
One reason it makes very little difference is that a labour govt would sign up to things anyway. Blair for instance gave away our rebate. In any real world vaguely rational people care to inhabit it will make little real difference. I am not particularly fussed about joining the EEA, but I note some people offer some downsides.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
Rene MarshVerified account @Rene_MarshCNN 32m32 minutes ago Jeb Bush a devout Catholic does not defend Pope Francis' comments on Trump when speaking to CNN's Dana Bash #cnn
Ray Lawson @Lawsonbulk 31m31 minutes ago Bush appears to have thrown the Pope under the bus on the Trump statement
So the GOP will be forced to take Trump's side against the Pope, just 2 days before S.Carolina and 5 before Nevada.
Man on the telly Roger Melly. I was hoping for Finbarr Saunders but I'll just have to put up with this crushing blow.
If Peston's right about the Belgians and their no second vote, well so what? If we vote we are out yay! Back in the real world we would all then start cobbling together a real second negotiation ( not the pretend nonsense Cameron is dressing up) about our future relationship at two steps remove from the European core. Call it what you will it doesn't matter really, so I can't really see what the Belgians are willy waving about. Probably just want five minutes in the limelight bless 'em.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
Boris has always been a lay for next leader. If he comes out for Leave his price will come in and make him a better value lay.
HYFUD More starving Catholics..voting to create more starving Catholics.
Actually some Latin American economies are growing faster than we are
A naturally increasing population is a good thing, within reason, as it ensures a healthy supply of workers. All things being equal, a society which is averaging 2.4 children per mother is in a better place than one that's averaging 1.4.
The only way that makes sense to me is if it's really at Cameron's request (obviously it can't be seen to be his idea). Then he can say, "This is really it, must get it right first time, yada yada." It helps him fight the "the EU always rings twice" meme.
It makes no sense (that I can see) on any other level. What do the Belgians care if there are a thousand negotiations (other than boredom at the personal level)?
Rene MarshVerified account @Rene_MarshCNN 32m32 minutes ago Jeb Bush a devout Catholic does not defend Pope Francis' comments on Trump when speaking to CNN's Dana Bash #cnn
Ray Lawson @Lawsonbulk 31m31 minutes ago Bush appears to have thrown the Pope under the bus on the Trump statement
So the GOP will be forced to take Trump's side against the Pope, just 2 days before S.Carolina and 5 before Nevada.
What will religous zealot Marco ‘Faith in Our Creator is the Most Important American Value of All’ Rubio say ?
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
Boris has always been a lay for next leader. If he comes out for Leave his price will come in and make him a better value lay.
The only way that makes sense to me is if it's really at Cameron's request (obviously it can't be seen to be his idea). Then he can say, "This is really it, must get it right first time, yada yada." It helps him fight the "the EU always rings twice" meme. It makes no sense (that I can see) on any other level. What do the Belgians care if there are a thousand negotiations (other than boredom at the personal level)?
Cameron thinks this will settle things. But it forces some people to believe its now out or never....
As to Belgium, well they struggle to hold their own country together.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
Boris has always been a lay for next leader. If he comes out for Leave his price will come in and make him a better value lay.
As to your last statement, how long this will be the case if we vote to stay in remains to be seen. I think you are seriously underestimating the hostility towards the City from the EU.
be the infamous government by fax.
Is it enough to conviny important to the UK, where staying in would go some way to avoiding the extra cost and almost certain disadvantages being imposed upon The City.
MiFiD is a disaster (my first job was working for Kay Swinburne's boss...let me just say I am not surprised).
There will be an attempt to take down the City soon after we vote to stay in. We've seen it in clearing, we've seen it in FFT, we've seen it in compensation policies that *increase* rather than reduce structural risk.
It will happen either way. Inside we have to accept the rules. Outside we can innovate around them. The Eurodollar market is significant in that respect. Fundamentally, though, there are few businesses that we want to be in that the EU can prevent us being in if we are independent.
MiFID is a pain in the a**e. MiFID II is worse and MiFIDs III-X I'm sure will be even moreso.
Much of it was predicated upon a move to transparency which, as you are aware, we in the UK kicked off in 2003 with the infamous CP176. MiFID now comes to determine the rules of how we trade european shares. And outside the EU, we don't get as much of a say to help formulate them. Despite @Richard_Tyndall pointing to Norway and various EEA clauses.
If you think we could create a synthetic euro shares market in the UK when the u/l is being traded elsewhere in Europe, and if that's your safety and growth strategy for the City of London post Brexit, then let's just say I disagree.
Man on the telly Roger Melly. I was hoping for Finbarr Saunders but I'll just have to put up with this crushing blow.
If Peston's right about the Belgians and their no second vote, well so what? If we vote we are out yay! Back in the real world we would all then start cobbling together a real second negotiation ( not the pretend nonsense Cameron is dressing up) about our future relationship at two steps remove from the European core. Call it what you will it doesn't matter really, so I can't really see what the Belgians are willy waving about. Probably just want five minutes in the limelight bless 'em.
The Belgian clause will be quite happily waved aside if it suits the EU. IVSTR lots of clauses on setting up the € re budget deficits etc which were lost in the mists of time when it suited the Eurozone.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
Correct. It's in Cameron's interest to maximise the fear factor and complicate any political calculation by his rivals, or George's.
Man on the telly Roger Melly. I was hoping for Finbarr Saunders but I'll just have to put up with this crushing blow.
If Peston's right about the Belgians and their no second vote, well so what? If we vote we are out yay! Back in the real world we would all then start cobbling together a real second negotiation ( not the pretend nonsense Cameron is dressing up) about our future relationship at two steps remove from the European core. Call it what you will it doesn't matter really, so I can't really see what the Belgians are willy waving about. Probably just want five minutes in the limelight bless 'em.
The Belgian clause will be quite happily waved aside if it suits the EU. IVSTR lots of clauses on setting up the € re budget deficits etc which were lost in the mists of time when it suited the Eurozone.
Exactly. It's all just bollocks, (maybe I am Roger Melly after all ).
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
Oh of course it's meaningless. If Britain votes for Leave, the whole system would be thrown into chaos. Holding another referendum would be one of the more likely scenarios. How could they engineer it? Oh, by having everyone agree to repeal the previous clause. That's not exactly difficult, is it?
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
I didn't think the clause meant that. I thought it was designed to stop a second vote in the event of a LEAVE victory. The idea being that leave means leave not vote leave then use that to bargain a better deal. I can see Belgium's point with that.
Peston on ITV stated just now that the EC have said to Cameron that there will be no coming back for a second deal if this one fails in the referendum. Peston said that Cameron welcomes that. Brinkmanship.
EUspeak, we can't ask for a second deal but there;s nothing stopping them offering us one.
I consider the idea of a 2nd referendum to be totally unacceptable.
I strongly, strongly, strongly want to REMAIN but if we (the remainers) lose the referendum then that's that. Game over. OUT would have won fair and square. I wouldn't turn out to vote for REMAIN in a second referendum.
The only way that makes sense to me is if it's really at Cameron's request (obviously it can't be seen to be his idea). Then he can say, "This is really it, must get it right first time, yada yada." It helps him fight the "the EU always rings twice" meme.
It makes no sense (that I can see) on any other level. What do the Belgians care if there are a thousand negotiations (other than boredom at the personal level)?
Surely they do care. The EU has enough on its plate, what with terrorism, the migrant crisis, Greece and Eurozone stagnation. The last thing they want is for the distraction of the UK's position to drag on and on for years.
Of course, if we Leave, it will drag on for a couple of years anyway.,
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
I didn't think the clause meant that. I thought it was designed to stop a second vote in the event of a LEAVE victory. The idea being that leave means leave not vote leave then use that to bargain a better deal. I can see Belgium's point with that.
I can't.
But then I can't actually see the point of Belgium either.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
I didn't think the clause meant that. I thought it was designed to stop a second vote in the event of a LEAVE victory. The idea being that leave means leave not vote leave then use that to bargain a better deal. I can see Belgium's point with that.
I can't.
But then I can't actually see the point of Belgium either.
I would strongly recommend looking at this piece by Richard North on UNECE and how it works in comparison to the EU. This is the sort of international co-operation we should be looking at - by mutual consent rather than dictat.
Surely the problem, though, is in the last paragraph? It's not in the UK's power to make that happen.
That is just a bit of wishful thinking by Richard North. It doesn't actually detract from the main thrust of the piece explaining how Norway in EFTA (as an example) has more influence over new legislation than the UK does inside the EU.
Britain in EFTA is a totally different animal than the piddling countries there now. But I do not have a great issue with Britain being in EFTA/EEA. But I know its not much different than where we are now. As long as we were to stay out of Schengen. So I am not greatly excited about Leave. But to avoid the political EU that's were we might end one day.
You keep repeating this 'no difference' line and it is of course utter rubbish. The vast majority of EU law today is outside of the Single Market rules and we would be able to return to making our own legislation to suit our own needs on all those areas. To say that it would make no difference is bizarre in the face of the facts.
One reason it makes very little difference is that a labour govt would sign up to things anyway. Blair for instance gave away our rebate. In any real world vaguely rational people care to inhabit it will make little real difference. I am not particularly fussed about joining the EEA, but I note some people offer some downsides.
And as I pointed out the other day when you came out with this rubbish if we are out a Labour government cannot commit us to them without us rejoining the EU.
You really have not the slightest clue about how it works do you.
I consider the idea of a 2nd referendum to be totally unacceptable.
I strongly, strongly, strongly want to REMAIN but if we (the remainers) lose the referendum then that's that. Game over. OUT would have won fair and square. I wouldn't turn out to vote for REMAIN in a second referendum.
As a fellow Remainer I entirely agree. I don't think a second referendum is politically practicable but I wouldn't want one if it were.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
I didn't think the clause meant that. I thought it was designed to stop a second vote in the event of a LEAVE victory. The idea being that leave means leave not vote leave then use that to bargain a better deal. I can see Belgium's point with that.
I can't.
But then I can't actually see the point of Belgium either.
It's a buffer (or tampon if you're speaking French). I'm sure there's a campaign merchandising opportunity there somewhere.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
This new Belgian clause is potentially tricky for him. Like others, I suspect his strategy may have been to back Remain but to argue that his backing is on a contingent basis, subject to future renegotiation. That door looks as if it is closing.
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
I think the Belgian clause is bollocks, tho - legally, politically and realistically. If the EU lurches into chaos after Brexit, and the British look like changing their mind - then of course there would be a 2nd referendum, to try and get us back in under "new terms". Realpolitik.
The clause would be meaningless.
I didn't think the clause meant that. I thought it was designed to stop a second vote in the event of a LEAVE victory. The idea being that leave means leave not vote leave then use that to bargain a better deal. I can see Belgium's point with that.
I can't.
But then I can't actually see the point of Belgium either.
Well given they share an army, a king, and a football team between the Flemings and the Walloons and that's about it, neither do many Belgians.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
Boris has always been a lay for next leader. If he comes out for Leave his price will come in and make him a better value lay.
Do you see George as a lay also?
Yep! I'm balls-deep laying Boris and have a substantial lay on Osborne.
I think the next leader will be from the Cabinet but not one of the two favourites. Boris just isn't a serious politician, too many skeletons and the membership won't vote for him. Osborne's fortune is now tied up with Cameron's, if DC is forced out after the referendum then GO won't replace him.
As this is a betting site I would like to point out that betfair and betdaq are banned in France and several other EU countries, in some cases explicitly and others by protectionist anti-competitive measures. This is just one example of the hypocrisy of the EU and the supposed single market but a relevant one for those of us on here.
As an aside, the question just being asked by the Telegraph, if Cameron did come back and say there was no deal yet but it would be finalised in 3 weeks, do you think he would dare tell the Eurosceptics in the Cabinet they could not campaign until then? Given he has already acted in bad faith by campaigning hard for REMAIN whilst keeping them gagged I am really not sure they would take it any more.
The only way that makes sense to me is if it's really at Cameron's request (obviously it can't be seen to be his idea). Then he can say, "This is really it, must get it right first time, yada yada." It helps him fight the "the EU always rings twice" meme.
It makes no sense (that I can see) on any other level. What do the Belgians care if there are a thousand negotiations (other than boredom at the personal level)?
Surely they do care. The EU has enough on its plate, what with terrorism, the migrant crisis, Greece and Eurozone stagnation. The last thing they want is for the distraction of the UK's position to drag on and on for years.
Of course, if we Leave, it will drag on for a couple of years anyway.,
Sure, they'd prefer it not to drag on forever. In reality I can't imagine that they wouldn't prefer extended negotiations to the damage the EU would sustain from the UK leaving, though.
HYFUD..An ever growing global population is about to become the the next danger problem for the world ..forget global warming.. this situation will overwhelm it..the tipping point is not too far away...
So they should be outraged, it's disgusting that people coming to shelter from problems elsewhere in the world then abuse the hospitality that Europe gives them.
HYFUD More starving Catholics..voting to create more starving Catholics.
Actually some Latin American economies are growing faster than we are
A naturally increasing population is a good thing, within reason, as it ensures a healthy supply of workers. All things being equal, a society which is averaging 2.4 children per mother is in a better place than one that's averaging 1.4.
Indeed, which is why Mexico will grow faster than Germany and Japan for the time being
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
After 40 plus years with an abusive partner I am not sure the argument that they would not be able to cope without us should hold much sway. It is rubbish anyway. They would do absolutely fine without us. Even if there were more defections by the non Eurozone countries, the core would remain and continue its journey to federalism.
Sure, they'd prefer it not to drag on forever. In reality I can't imagine that they wouldn't prefer extended negotiations to the damage the EU would sustain from the UK leaving, though.
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
Isn't this like the husband begging the wife not to leave after years of treating her like shit?
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
I tend to react favourably to that kind of thing but I am pro-Remain anyway. How would it be received by waverers, I wonder.
Before the indy referendum there were petitions organised in England, pleading with Scotland to stay. Not sure how they were received in Scotland.
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
After 40 plus years with an abusive partner I am not sure the argument that they would not be able to cope without us should hold much sway. It is rubbish anyway. They would do absolutely fine without us. Even if there were more defections by the non Eurozone countries, the core would remain and continue its journey to federalism.
People will hopefully look at what the EU does, not what it says
Enjoying the bantz about the Pope's intervention in US politics.
Apart from Our Lord Jesus Christ himself - render unto Caeser - surely the Ur-statement about securlarism was that made by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth I - "I would not seek a window into men's souls".
I speak as a Protestant Englishman who has always regarded the Roman church as an enemy of my country. I also miss LIAMT.
If you object to the capitalisations in Our Lord Jesus Christ then you must equally object to "The Prophet Mohammed". I don't buy either myself but resent that ine is privilaged in mainstream discourse.
We kill billions of creatures every day to feed the current world population..a large number of whom are undernourished and some are actually starving..we do not need an expansion of the population.. it will soon be impossible to feed everyone..we will run out of creatures to kill.
June Sarpong's on Question Time, as is future Prime Minister Justine Greening.
Sadly, Mr. Dancer, although officially on the fence I did a bit of research last night and it seems Greening has values-signalled Remain a couple of times.
I'm still hoping for a couple of brave late surprises (Penny Mordaunt is a win) but I'm afraid it is just that - hope.
You think Boris is just pissing about? (That's how it looks to me.)
Boris is positioning himself very nicely for the cabinet job he wants, and to be able to claim he strengthened Cameron's deal and just, on balance, backed Remain at the last minute but still with some reservations.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
That's what I predict, too. I'd be astonished if he came out for LEAVE.
If only there was a betting market on which side he will back... If he backs Remain he is a lay for next leader.
Boris has always been a lay for next leader. If he comes out for Leave his price will come in and make him a better value lay.
Do you see George as a lay also?
Yep! I'm balls-deep laying Boris and have a substantial lay on Osborne.
I think the next leader will be from the Cabinet but not one of the two favourites. Boris just isn't a serious politician, too many skeletons and the membership won't vote for him. Osborne's fortune is now tied up with Cameron's, if DC is forced out after the referendum then GO won't replace him.
I really like these long term markets.
My first betfair bet on next Tory leader says "Matched: 20:35 30-Jul-11" which was laying Rory Stewart at 9-1 (bf 10) in £3.
I rather hope my counterparty wins. Admittedly a little less so than I hope Rees-Mogg rises to the fore.
HYFUD..An ever growing global population is about to become the the next danger problem for the world ..forget global warming.. this situation will overwhelm it..the tipping point is not too far away...
Not in Japan or much of the West it is not, there the population is declining and the fastest population growth is in Africa or the Middle East, neither of which are Catholic strongholds
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
Is that you, Sean? Or has someone calm and reasonable hacked into your computer?
We kill billions of creatures every day to feed the current world population..a large number of whom are undernourished and some are actually starving..we do not need an expansion of the population.. it will soon be impossible to feed everyone..we will run out of creatures to kill.
No it won't as we can farm more and more creatures. This Malthusian nonsense has been disproven time and again.
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
I tend to react favourably to that kind of thing but I am pro-Remain anyway. How would it be received by waverers, I wonder.
Before the indy referendum there were petitions organised in England, pleading with Scotland to stay. Not sure how they were received in Scotland.
Presumably they were organized by the Labour Party!
HYFUD Who gives a toss if they are Catholics or not.. starvation and deprivation is not concerned with religion..We must arrive at a manageable number of people in the world or everyone will suffer..Any religion or political principle that demands even more population growth is a criminal organisation.
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
Is that you, Sean? Or has someone calm and reasonable hacked into your computer?
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
Isn't this like the husband begging the wife not to leave after years of treating her like shit?
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
And I think you are wrong. The battered wife meme perfectly describes the relationship we have and there are few if any areas where we benefit. Meanwhile the EU is happy to have a girlfriend on the side who gets all the benefits but doesn't have to put up with the abuse.
The fact that very rarely we might get a bunch of flowers does not excuse the general bad behaviour we have to suffer.
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
Is that you, Sean? Or has someone calm and reasonable hacked into your computer?
I'm on my third large gin and tonic.
Though I am also serious. Eurosceptics do themselves no favours with this emotional hyperbole.
Says the man who spends his whole life writing hyperbole (except when he is on his third large G&T)
Lech Walesa, the legendary anti-communist leader who played a historic role in bringing down communism in Poland and across Eastern Europe, had served as a paid informant in the 1970s for the same communist regime that he later fought, according to documents revealed publicly Thursday.
Rubio-Cruz is very tricky to work out. Cruz did have that ground game in Iowa, mind.
Yes, I expect he will here too, as it's natural country for him. Mind you, ground game is less important in a primary than a caucus.
I think he'll come second, with Rubio close on his heels and the other two vying for a weak fourth place. Just enough for all five to prolong the pain.
We kill billions of creatures every day to feed the current world population..a large number of whom are undernourished and some are actually starving..we do not need an expansion of the population.. it will soon be impossible to feed everyone..we will run out of creatures to kill.
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
Isn't this like the husband begging the wife not to leave after years of treating her like shit?
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
Fair point. I may have overegged the pudding a tad. It just seems to me that we get the rough end of it. We gold plate EU rules and other countries ignore when it suits. c.f when our beef was declared safe after the BSE business in the 90's. Blair offering up half our rebate for reform of the CAP and nothing happens etc. If the EU really want us to stay, how about introducing one really great reform? A single European language.
HYFUD Who gives a toss if they are Catholics or not.. starvation and deprivation is not concerned with religion..We must arrive at a manageable number of people in the world or everyone will suffer..Any religion or political principle that demands even more population growth is a criminal organisation.
The World's population is perfectly manageable. Most rich countries would benefit from higher birthrates.
Yep! I'm balls-deep laying Boris and have a substantial lay on Osborne.
I think the next leader will be from the Cabinet but not one of the two favourites. Boris just isn't a serious politician, too many skeletons and the membership won't vote for him. Osborne's fortune is now tied up with Cameron's, if DC is forced out after the referendum then GO won't replace him.
I think that's right though I've been cautious (too cautious, probably) so far and more or less break even if it's Osborne or Boris.
What I'm puzzling over is who are the favourites in the event of Leave, now that every obvious successor has gone with Remain.
Remarkably, I just heard maybe the best argument for REMAIN from Belgo-Federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, on C4 News.
Which was?
Just a straightforward, but fairly passionate assertion of how the UK would be much weaker without the EU, and - significantly - the EU would be crippled without the UK. It was probably more persuasive that it came from a Federalist, who has been quite Anglophobic in the past.
REMAIN would do well to use Europeans like this. Everyone likes a bit of flattery. Let the Federalists come and grovel to us, and beg us to stay, with tears in their eyes.
Isn't this like the husband begging the wife not to leave after years of treating her like shit?
I think this meme that Britain is a battered wife in Europe is fairly ridiculous, and borderline offensive. We get an OK deal, some good, some bad. Of course it is very arguable we'd get a better deal as an independent nation - I can be persuaded of that - but I do not believe we are being regularly "abused" by the EU. It's arrant nonsense.
Moreover, the European Feds have been quite open and honest with us. They want a real European state - with ever closer union, which is in the Treaty of Rome. They are therefore mystified as to why we complain when ever closer union happens.
The people who should be the targets of our anger are UK politicians who have lied about Europe, from Edward Heath onwards, despite knowing full well that we were engaged in deep political integration. And I include David Cameron with his farcical "deal" in this roll call of shame and lies.
These people are the bastards who need a slap. I despise them.
I'm on my 4th G&T now.
Edward Heath only had to win once. And he did.
He's probably the most disastrous Prime Minister this country has ever had.
Comments
Only the octo-lemur possess infallible foresight.
If you're interested a very good program on Radio 4 about the ex Pope's letters to a female friend over several decades and their relationship.
Done as only the BBC can.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b072jknz
I answered properly to all the, er, leading questions - yes to large breasts, £5 handjob and so on.
Not going to give up trying!!
"I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt," the Pope said.
I find it barely credible that people are surprised that the pope (or any cleric) says he prefers building bridges to building walls.
From what I have seem Trumps response was crass even by his standards.
If it all falls apart subsequently, he will disown it and blame Cameron. And claim he always had his doubts as a natural Leaver.
Others may be fooled. I am not.
48/60 did know what the referendum was about but very few knew any of the detail.
I had no idea that @Alanbrooke was that alienated.
An openly atheist President is, I think, not currently possible.
Edit: tbf Mr Logic is an archetypal PBer
It wouldn't surprise me if David Cameron colluded in its closing, incidentally.
Rene MarshVerified account @Rene_MarshCNN 32m32 minutes ago
Jeb Bush a devout Catholic does not defend Pope Francis' comments on Trump when speaking to CNN's Dana Bash #cnn
Ray Lawson @Lawsonbulk 31m31 minutes ago
Bush appears to have thrown the Pope under the bus on the Trump statement
So the GOP will be forced to take Trump's side against the Pope, just 2 days before S.Carolina and 5 before Nevada.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/18/polish-magazines-islamic-of-europe-cover-sparks-outrage
If Peston's right about the Belgians and their no second vote, well so what? If we vote we are out yay! Back in the real world we would all then start cobbling together a real second negotiation ( not the pretend nonsense Cameron is dressing up) about our future relationship at two steps remove from the European core. Call it what you will it doesn't matter really, so I can't really see what the Belgians are willy waving about. Probably just want five minutes in the limelight bless 'em.
It makes no sense (that I can see) on any other level. What do the Belgians care if there are a thousand negotiations (other than boredom at the personal level)?
As to Belgium, well they struggle to hold their own country together.
"If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."
Much of it was predicated upon a move to transparency which, as you are aware, we in the UK kicked off in 2003 with the infamous CP176. MiFID now comes to determine the rules of how we trade european shares. And outside the EU, we don't get as much of a say to help formulate them. Despite @Richard_Tyndall pointing to Norway and various EEA clauses.
If you think we could create a synthetic euro shares market in the UK when the u/l is being traded elsewhere in Europe, and if that's your safety and growth strategy for the City of London post Brexit, then let's just say I disagree.
IVSTR lots of clauses on setting up the € re budget deficits etc which were lost in the mists of time when it suited the Eurozone.
I strongly, strongly, strongly want to REMAIN but if we (the remainers) lose the referendum then that's that. Game over. OUT would have won fair and square. I wouldn't turn out to vote for REMAIN in a second referendum.
Of course, if we Leave, it will drag on for a couple of years anyway.,
But then I can't actually see the point of Belgium either.
You really have not the slightest clue about how it works do you.
I think the next leader will be from the Cabinet but not one of the two favourites. Boris just isn't a serious politician, too many skeletons and the membership won't vote for him. Osborne's fortune is now tied up with Cameron's, if DC is forced out after the referendum then GO won't replace him.
Clinton 44 Trump 43
Clinton 43 Cruz 46
Clinton 41 Rubio 48
Clinton 43 Bush 44
Clinton 39 Kasich 47
Sanders 48 Trump 42
Sanders 49 Cruz 39
Sanders 47 Rubio 41
Sanders 49 Bush 39
Sanders 45 Kasich 41
Sanders 38 Trump 38 Bloomberg 12
Sanders 39 Cruz 33 Bloomberg 14
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us02182016_Urpfd42.pdf
Oh...
ARG 2/16 - 2/17 400 LV T33 C13 R20 B8 K15 C3
Before the indy referendum there were petitions organised in England, pleading with Scotland to stay. Not sure how they were received in Scotland.
Apart from Our Lord Jesus Christ himself - render unto Caeser - surely the Ur-statement about securlarism was that made by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth I - "I would not seek a window into men's souls".
I speak as a Protestant Englishman who has always regarded the Roman church as an enemy of my country. I also miss LIAMT.
If you object to the capitalisations in Our Lord Jesus Christ then you must equally object to "The Prophet Mohammed". I don't buy either myself but resent that ine is privilaged in mainstream discourse.
My first betfair bet on next Tory leader says "Matched: 20:35 30-Jul-11" which was laying Rory Stewart at 9-1 (bf 10) in £3.
I rather hope my counterparty wins. Admittedly a little less so than I hope Rees-Mogg rises to the fore.
The fact that very rarely we might get a bunch of flowers does not excuse the general bad behaviour we have to suffer.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0231b5f00c464c95bc667d7d1d72620b/official-documents-show-walesa-collaborated-regime
I think he'll come second, with Rubio close on his heels and the other two vying for a weak fourth place. Just enough for all five to prolong the pain.
It just seems to me that we get the rough end of it.
We gold plate EU rules and other countries ignore when it suits. c.f when our beef was declared safe after the BSE business in the 90's.
Blair offering up half our rebate for reform of the CAP and nothing happens etc.
If the EU really want us to stay, how about introducing one really great reform?
A single European language.
What I'm puzzling over is who are the favourites in the event of Leave, now that every obvious successor has gone with Remain.
He's probably the most disastrous Prime Minister this country has ever had.
Despicable man.