Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just imagine if this story happened during the general elec

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited August 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just imagine if this story happened during the general election campaign and not in the silly season 4 years before a general election

11am – Richard Barbrook talks at launch of Jeremy Corbyn's digital manifesto
12pm – He is revealed as 'supporter of IRA's armed struggle'

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited August 2016
    1st, like the Tories at the next election.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Second :(
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Bronze?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited August 2016
    I would like to credit Jezza's digital strategy for allowing me to reach this exalted position on the thread...

    First among losers.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited August 2016
    4th :o ?

    Edit: 5th like Germany ;(
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    No, you see, we were told, people are disliking Corbyn and co in a kneejerk response.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Pulpstar said:

    4th :o ?

    You wish !
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Corbyn and his advisers don't care about these things. It is not necessary for the revolution to care what the media or public think. The project comes first.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,094
    Tenth like UKIP
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    On the second issue it's more serious, we can debate freedom of speech in Italy in 1998, but that is also debatable since only in america freedom of speech is legal.
    But support for clear criminal activities should not be allowed publication.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    12th like TTIP.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,094
    FPT

    If I were a Labour member looking at Smith standing on a Corbynite programme but being backed by every virulent anti-Corbynite in the party, I wouldn't trust him an inch.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Scott_P said:

    I would like to credit Jezza's digital strategy for allowing me to reach this exalted position on the thread...

    First among losers.

    Jezza's digital strategy doesn't stretch to reserving a seat online on a train, but from what I gleaned from today's offering ( prior to the revelations cited above ) encourages us to supply our digital details to a Jezza run govt Big Brother style, that I'm sure Pyongyang would be proud of.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    When I first saw the headline I thought it was something to do with former Barking BNP candidate Richard Barnbrook.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited August 2016
    It is of no concern in this election.

    Three are two positions:

    1. Left wing desire to alter the party and it's governing institutions and committees to a permenant left wing outlook. Vote JC

    Almost all other options vote the other guy. Problem is he isn't inspirational to get the more lethargic to support him.

    This isn't about leading labour, it is about where labour is going.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    Same old excuse, but besides that he was alleged to be wearing a badge of a dissident republican terrorist group that is still engaged in terrorism.
  • To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
  • Not sure why we should be shocked...

    Commie - check
    Terrorist sympathizer - check
    anti-Semitism - check

    Isn't that the entry requirement for corbyn inner circle?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Didn't one get sacked for joining UKIP last year?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
    Metropolitan Democrats of course.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    AndyJS said:

    When I first saw the headline I thought it was something to do with former Barking BNP candidate Richard Barnbrook.

    He would probably be less offensive
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    Not sure why we should be shocked...

    Commie - check
    Terrorist sympathizer - check
    anti-Semitism - check

    Isn't that the entry requirement for corbyn inner circle?

    The only thing they require is:

    Not a Tory - check

    Anything else goes.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
    Metropolitan Democrats of course.
    Swing states?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,387
    edited August 2016
    glw said:

    Not sure why we should be shocked...

    Commie - check
    Terrorist sympathizer - check
    anti-Semitism - check

    Isn't that the entry requirement for corbyn inner circle?

    The only thing they require is:

    Not a Tory - check

    Anything else goes.
    Not a Tory*

    "Tory" includes those voting for the Lib Dems, Conservatives, or UKIP; anyone who likes Blair, supported the Iraq war, prioritises power over purity, didn't vote for Corbyn last year...

    As a lawyer I'm tempted to invoke the idea of a "constructive Tory"...
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    On the second issue it's more serious, we can debate freedom of speech in Italy in 1998, but that is also debatable since only in america freedom of speech is legal.
    But support for clear criminal activities should not be allowed publication.

    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    On the second issue it's more serious, we can debate freedom of speech in Italy in 1998, but that is also debatable since only in america freedom of speech is legal.
    But support for clear criminal activities should not be allowed publication.

    There is with me and I suspect my generation. I'm the wrong side of 50 and I remember who was supporting whom and when, and Jezza was not exactly on the right side of the IRA issue at the appropriate times. Now I'm not going to vote for Jezza this side of the Apocalypse ( and not even then I may add) so I don't matter in that sense. But it will matter to others, as will Hamas and what all that says about him,
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
  • Who do the inhabitants of trailer parks vote for?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,922

    Not sure why we should be shocked...

    Commie - check
    Terrorist sympathizer - check
    anti-Semitism - check

    Isn't that the entry requirement for corbyn inner circle?

    He's probably just a Watford supporter who defended publication of the offending book because it appeared under the name of Luther Blissett. I'm sure 'Have it' would be siding with him on this one.
  • Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    Sounds like social housing associations. Main purpose seems to be to provide well paid agreeable employment for guardian reading public sector types. I gather in many places in the North their rents are now higher than private sector rent.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,926
    edited August 2016

    Who do the inhabitants of trailer parks vote for?

    Dunno, but their favourite method of voting is RV as opposed to AV :lol:
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
    Metropolitan Democrats of course.
    Swing states?
    I haven't asked them, but they have a weird infatuation with Canada and it's PM.
    Most of them remind me of London Labour voters in profile, image and behaviour, that's why I said metropolitan.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited August 2016
    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    People keep saying that, but it isn't the same thing at all. It is perfectly possible to accept working with Sinn Fein was necessary, when the IRA itself was willing to lay down its arms, and yet not like people who actively were on the side of the IRA at the time. People in Sinn Fein you expect to have supported the armed struggle. It's a fatuous comparison at best.
  • Sandpit said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Didn't one get sacked for joining UKIP last year?
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sussex-university-lee-salter-convicted-lecturer-assault-beating-allison-smith-safety-disregard-a7187831.html
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016
    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    People keep saying that, but it isn't the same thing at all. It is perfectly possible to accept working with Sinn Fein was necessary, when the IRA itself was willing to lay down its arms, and yet not like people who actively were on the side of the IRA at the time. People in Sinn Fein you expect to have supported the armed struggle. It's a fatuous comparison at best.
    True, it's perfectly fine to not like your ex-enemy.
    But a peace treaty is a treaty.

    Most people don't like the Germans even though the war ended in 1945, most people don't like the Russians even though the Cold War ended in 1989, heck some don't like the French even though the war against them ended in 1815.
    You can't force people to like others.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    glw said:

    Not sure why we should be shocked...

    Commie - check
    Terrorist sympathizer - check
    anti-Semitism - check

    Isn't that the entry requirement for corbyn inner circle?

    The only thing they require is:

    Not a Tory - check

    Anything else goes.
    Not a Tory*

    "Tory" includes those voting for the Lib Dems, Conservatives, or UKIP; anyone who likes Blair, supported the Iraq war, prioritises power over purity, didn't vote for Corbyn last year...

    As a lawyer I'm tempted to invoke the idea of a "constructive Tory"...
    Would that work like constructive dismissal?

    "I'm suing for constructive Toryism because Jeremy Corbyn put me in a position of responsibility where I had to compromise my beliefs."
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    England heading to a 3rd World Record of the day - the biggest ever winning margin in a ODI
  • kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    People keep saying that, but it isn't the same thing at all. It is perfectly possible to accept working with Sinn Fein was necessary, when the IRA itself was willing to lay down its arms, and yet not like people who actively were on the side of the IRA at the time. People in Sinn Fein you expect to have supported the armed struggle. It's a fatuous comparison at best.
    The Late Dr Paisley gave every impression of very much liking Martin McGunness who was allegedly some sort of IRA Field Marshall to the extent that they were known as the chuckle brothers..
  • Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
    Metropolitan Democrats of course.
    Swing states?
    I haven't asked them, but they have a weird infatuation with Canada and it's PM.
    Most of them remind me of London Labour voters in profile, image and behaviour, that's why I said metropolitan.
    I,ve often wondered what sort of result you would get if New England states held referendums on leaving the USA and joining Canada.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited August 2016
    In the weird world of corbynistas, Beardy branson - bad, commie terrorist sympathizing peado defending hypermedia studies lecturer - good.

    And he really does teach a course called that....oh and he wrote a book about how Wired magazine is an evil publication.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Barbrook sounds a right charmer.

    That being said, I would be willing to listen to a sane and reasonable person (so not the Jezziah) who had a sensible proposal about BT Openreach, and I would be open minded about public ownership of that aspect of the national infrastructure.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,184
    edited August 2016
    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,922

    England heading to a 3rd World Record of the day - the biggest ever winning margin in a ODI

    But Pakistan are already half way there ...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    In the weird world of corbynistas, Beardy branson - bad, commie terrorist sympathizing peado defending hypermedia studies lecturer - good.

    And he really does teach a course called that....oh and he wrote a book about how Wired magazine is an evil publication.

    What did Wired do to upset him?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2016

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    The poll has Jill Stein at 2% but I thought her name is not on the ballot in North Carolina.
    This should worry Clinton Clinton holds a 54% to 33% lead when voters are asked whom they expect to win the election. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Clinton voters believe she will prevail, while only 66% of Trump supporters think he will.", complacency is her campaigns biggest danger.

    All democrats that I know of think she is going to win by a landslide, because they say Trump is a racist and cannot believe that a racist can ever win an election.

    Not all republicans think Trump can win, because of his big mouth.
    Yeah but are those Democrats New England type Democrats or wwc Democrats?
    Metropolitan Democrats of course.
    Swing states?
    I haven't asked them, but they have a weird infatuation with Canada and it's PM.
    Most of them remind me of London Labour voters in profile, image and behaviour, that's why I said metropolitan.
    I,ve often wondered what sort of result you would get if New England states held referendums on leaving the USA and joining Canada.
    If Trump becomes president, all of them but Maine.

    There was even talk about California seceding early in the year in the event of a Trump presidency.

    However since Trump's chances are low, there won't be enough time between Trump's election and Trump's inevitable impeachment for any US state to secede.

    He would have caught the democrats with their pants down.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    In the weird world of corbynistas, Beardy branson - bad, commie terrorist sympathizing peado defending hypermedia studies lecturer - good.

    And he really does teach a course called that....oh and he wrote a book about how Wired magazine is an evil publication.

    What did Wired do to upset him?
    I believe some bollocks about it being a symbol of neoliberalism. Can you imagine what horseshit he teaches on his hypermedia studies course.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    England heading to a 3rd World Record of the day - the biggest ever winning margin in a ODI

    But Pakistan are already half way there ...
    They've woken up about 35 overs and eight wickets too late!
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,572
    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    On the second issue it's more serious, we can debate freedom of speech in Italy in 1998, but that is also debatable since only in america freedom of speech is legal.
    But support for clear criminal activities should not be allowed publication.

    Speedy said:

    On the first issue about the IRA, the war in N.Ireland ended almost 20 years ago and the Sinn Fein has meet and talked with countless ministers and politicians since then.
    If Ian Paisley got in bed with them there is no issue.

    On the second issue it's more serious, we can debate freedom of speech in Italy in 1998, but that is also debatable since only in america freedom of speech is legal.
    But support for clear criminal activities should not be allowed publication.

    There is with me and I suspect my generation. I'm the wrong side of 50 and I remember who was supporting whom and when, and Jezza was not exactly on the right side of the IRA issue at the appropriate times. Now I'm not going to vote for Jezza this side of the Apocalypse ( and not even then I may add) so I don't matter in that sense. But it will matter to others, as will Hamas and what all that says about him,
    Older voters matters. As ever, there will be some who are swing voters, and some (like you) who are not. The conventional polling wisdom is that there are not many swing voters amongst older voters. That conventional wisdom is wrong.

    In the last YouGov, Labour support was down to 24% for your (and my) generation (50-64) and down to 13% (!) for over 65s. The Conservative lead was 18% for 50-64 and a massive 45% for 65+. Now compare with five years ago - 28th August 2011 - at the equivalent period under Miliband. Labour was just 6% behind the Conservatives in the then 60+ sub-break (41% Con, 35% Lab).

    That is a huge change of political allegiance amongst older voters. A combination of many things is behind it, but Corbyn is one of them. People by now have very firm opinions on Corbyn, and Labour cannot recover that loss of support with him in charge.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    Morgan Kelly once wrote that the average Irish university had two-thirds of its staff in admin, on an average salary of £75,000 per year.

    I don't think British universities are quite that bad, but certainly at Aberystwyth there were more non-academic than academic departments and I would estimate they accounted for between 40 and 50% of the staff with allowance for double counting (I was both a lecturer and an administrator at one time, confusingly).
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,922
    Sandpit said:

    England heading to a 3rd World Record of the day - the biggest ever winning margin in a ODI

    But Pakistan are already half way there ...
    They've woken up about 35 overs and eight wickets too late!
    Amir has just hit two consecutive sixes!
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,922
    Sorry, three!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,184
    On thread - this WILL happen during a GE campaign, if Corbyn is still leader, because he seems to have an almost limitless supply of these nutters.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Sorry, three!

    And the WR for biggest winning margin has slipped from England's grasp (like that dropped catch in the last over)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Amir with a pair trio of sixers, but way too little and way too late.
  • Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    Our system is already much quicker than that on the other side of the Atlantic. I got my MSc in 4 years (3 for BSc, then 1 postgrad for MSc). In the States it would have taken 6 years (4 for BSc, 2 postgrad for MSc).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Cookie said:

    On thread - this WILL happen during a GE campaign, if Corbyn is still leader, because he seems to have an almost limitless supply of these nutters.

    He is one of them. Very similar criticisms to these could be levelled at him from his behaviour in the 1980s. That is the core of the problem.

    It was in that spirit that I thought electing him was a distinctly courageous decision. But I never dreamed he would prove this bloody awful.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Got to feel for Amir there. He hits 19 off the over, and yet as a result the required run rate goes UP!
  • I reckon this guy is so bat shit crazy, you wouldn't need to waterboard him, putting him in a room with a copy of the Daily Mail for a couple of hours and he would be begging to be released from the inhuman torture.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Why didn't they send Amir in at three and tell him to have some fun, or that the Fake Sheikh was just behind long-off or something?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,405

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    Our system is already much quicker than that on the other side of the Atlantic. I got my MSc in 4 years (3 for BSc, then 1 postgrad for MSc). In the States it would have taken 6 years (4 for BSc, 2 postgrad for MSc).
    Similar lengthy process in Canada. It takes a bloody age for people to qualify in medicine, for example. Some take the fast track option of studying in the Caribbean, but then still need to get their qualification recognised back home. I think we have the better system by far.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100



    Older voters matters. As ever, there will be some who are swing voters, and some (like you) who are not. The conventional polling wisdom is that there are not many swing voters amongst older voters. That conventional wisdom is wrong.

    In the last YouGov, Labour support was down to 24% for your (and my) generation (50-64) and down to 13% (!) for over 65s. The Conservative lead was 18% for 50-64 and a massive 45% for 65+. Now compare with five years ago - 28th August 2011 - at the equivalent period under Miliband. Labour was just 6% behind the Conservatives in the then 60+ sub-break (41% Con, 35% Lab).

    That is a huge change of political allegiance amongst older voters. A combination of many things is behind it, but Corbyn is one of them. People by now have very firm opinions on Corbyn, and Labour cannot recover that loss of support with him in charge.

    I've seen it in the exit poll of 2015.
    It was a record difference of support between those over 65 and those under 35.

    I made the comment a few days later on PB that it appears that we have 2 different and distinct societies, those born before 1970 and those born after 1970, that have entirely different and diverging views on everything.

    I'm not surprised that the divergence has continued, it's probably due to the entirely different worlds those two groups grew up in.

    It's like those who grew up in the Victorian era and lived in the 1960's.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Crikey. That's a rip off, surely?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    MTimT said:

    Got to feel for Amir there. He hits 19 off the over, and yet as a result the required run rate goes UP!

    That's what happens when you need 200 in ten overs ;)

    All over now, England win the match and the series.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    welshowl said:

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Crikey. That's a rip off, surely?
    Yep - I suspect it is the same for students who spend 6 months or a year on an industrial placement (or similar)
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,922
    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Got to feel for Amir there. He hits 19 off the over, and yet as a result the required run rate goes UP!

    That's what happens when you need 200 in ten overs ;)

    All over now, England win the match and the series.
    Still, Amir gets the highest ever one day score for a number 11!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Got to feel for Amir there. He hits 19 off the over, and yet as a result the required run rate goes UP!

    That's what happens when you need 200 in ten overs ;)

    All over now, England win the match and the series.
    Still, Amir gets the highest ever one day score for a number 11!
    That was a valiant last stand - should really have played him up the order, as @ydoethur suggests.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    edited August 2016
    I was never a Tim fan, but compared to any of the Corbynistas he's alright.

    @SebastianEPayne @moorlanddragon Does Corbyn advertise specifically for "anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists who support the IRA?"

    — GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius) 30 August 2016
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited August 2016
    glw said:

    I was never a Tim fan, but compared to any of the Corbynistas he's alright.

    @SebastianEPayne @moorlanddragon Does Corbyn advertise specifically for "anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists who support the IRA?"

    — GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius) 30 August 2016

    Timmy has a long history with these folk. He was fighting the likes of SWP lot years before he found PB.com
  • One of the longest-serving and most prominent leaders of so-called Islamic State (IS) has been killed in Syria, IS-affiliated media say.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37224570

    Nevermind.
  • welshowl said:

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Crikey. That's a rip off, surely?
    Yep - I suspect it is the same for students who spend 6 months or a year on an industrial placement (or similar)
    Jaw Dropping.

    50 seconds into this video describes it:

    https://youtu.be/KRGes_vU3HU.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Depends what they do for that year, surely? If you get tuition in the other place, maybe there is a financial arrangement between the two institutions?
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    RobD said:

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Depends what they do for that year, surely? If you get tuition in the other place, maybe there is a financial arrangement between the two institutions?
    Most people are working as language assistants in schools - so getting no tuition
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Hasn't that been the case pretty much since their economy collapsed? I don't know whether the 'observers' are still in situ or not but officially and unofficially the EU still holds about 75% of Ireland's debts on the ECB balance sheets.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .
    There is no way that most undergraduates get £9,000 per year of education. Compare the education and facilities that a private school provides, for the fees, with that provided by a university.
    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Depends what they do for that year, surely? If you get tuition in the other place, maybe there is a financial arrangement between the two institutions?
    Most people are working as language assistants in schools - so getting no tuition
    At least one uni you pay a significantly reduced tuition rate (£1350 for a year), justified because you keep in touch with a tutor at the university while working abroad.

    http://www.exeter.ac.uk/international/studyabroad/outbound/feesandfunding/
  • Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Because Apple trades within the EU and is subject to EU laws including bans on State Aid that were agreed and ratified by all nation states.

    Not to say that this decision was right or wrong, or whether it was made for the right or wrong reasons. But on the question of can the EU fine Apple the answer is an unequivocal yes.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    FPT:
    Charles said:

    On the Apple Irish tax question, I'm puzzled as to how Ireland could ever collect the dosh even if it wanted to. Let's suppose the Irish government doesn't appeal, or loses the appeal, then what next? If it then decides to try to collect the extra tax, then presumably it would have to collect it under Irish law. Apple would no doubt resist that in the Irish courts, and surely they'd have a strong, not to say impregnable case? After all, the Irish government itself has stated in no uncertain terms that the extra tax isn't payable, and there's no suggestion that Irish tax law has been broken.

    Isn't it repayment of illegal state aid, not a tax collection issue?
    Maybe, but it still makes no sense. Imagine the court scene:

    "M'lud, the government has repeatedly stated that there was no illegal state aid, yet it has brought my client to this court in order to ask you to order repayment of illegal state aid which it denies ever existed..."

    Aint' gonna fly, it seems to me...
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Cookie said:

    Speedy said:

    To be honest, I think the University of Westminster should be considering whether Barbrook is the sort of person who should be teaching for them.

    A man with his record is not someone I would like to see having influence like that.

    You obviously didn't hear about the story at Sussex uni...it seems nothing can get you sacked from some institutions.
    Someone does need to take our University sector apart and rebuild it from scratch.

    Too many people teaching degrees with very little worth to too many undergraduates

    And too many graduate programmes being set up just to attract foreign students

    We need to educate our students to the benefit of our nation first.
    I think the problem with the universities in both Britain and America is that they are treated as a money making machine, rather than an educational one.

    College tuition fees and University tuition fees are simply being increased astronomically just to cover the ever expanding waste in administration, or simply that the administrators are increasing the fees in order to increase their spending in administration and waste it on themselves.

    It reminds me of the old Peter Sellers movie "Where does it hurt ?" .

    For those who do get £9,000's worth of education, most of them could probably be educated just as effectively more cheaply.
    There is also no reason a degree course needs to be as long as three years.
    A significant proportion of what gets taught on a degree course is of use neither to students nor to employers.
    The system is ripe for reform.
    One of the things that amazes me is that Modern Language students who have to spend a year abroad are still charged full fees for that year - even though they get no tuition at all.
    Depends what they do for that year, surely? If you get tuition in the other place, maybe there is a financial arrangement between the two institutions?
    Most people are working as language assistants in schools - so getting no tuition
    At least one uni you pay a significantly reduced tuition rate (£1350 for a year), justified because you keep in touch with a tutor at the university while working abroad.

    http://www.exeter.ac.uk/international/studyabroad/outbound/feesandfunding/
    That is good to know - and perhaps things have moved on since I last looked into this

    But £1350 for a couple of emails from your tutor is hardly good value
  • FPT:

    Charles said:

    On the Apple Irish tax question, I'm puzzled as to how Ireland could ever collect the dosh even if it wanted to. Let's suppose the Irish government doesn't appeal, or loses the appeal, then what next? If it then decides to try to collect the extra tax, then presumably it would have to collect it under Irish law. Apple would no doubt resist that in the Irish courts, and surely they'd have a strong, not to say impregnable case? After all, the Irish government itself has stated in no uncertain terms that the extra tax isn't payable, and there's no suggestion that Irish tax law has been broken.

    Isn't it repayment of illegal state aid, not a tax collection issue?
    Maybe, but it still makes no sense. Imagine the court scene:

    "M'lud, the government has repeatedly stated that there was no illegal state aid, yet it has brought my client to this court in order to ask you to order repayment of illegal state aid which it denies ever existed..."

    Aint' gonna fly, it seems to me...
    The Irish lawyers could simply say that the EU law takes precedence and it has been settled at higher courts and the Irish courts are obliged to recognise the supremacy of EU law and not what the Irish government wanted.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Hasn't that been the case pretty much since their economy collapsed? I don't know whether the 'observers' are still in situ or not but officially and unofficially the EU still holds about 75% of Ireland's debts on the ECB balance sheets.
    Ireland is constrained by the EU - Ireland has agreements with the EU. Apple has agreements with Ireland. The EU wishes to be an adult rushing in and saying that no matter what the silly children did its time for the adults.

    Ireland is being dismissed as an irrelevance.

    Perhaps there's another way of looking at this, but if I was Irish I think I'd be pretty upset.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460

    FPT:

    Charles said:

    On the Apple Irish tax question, I'm puzzled as to how Ireland could ever collect the dosh even if it wanted to. Let's suppose the Irish government doesn't appeal, or loses the appeal, then what next? If it then decides to try to collect the extra tax, then presumably it would have to collect it under Irish law. Apple would no doubt resist that in the Irish courts, and surely they'd have a strong, not to say impregnable case? After all, the Irish government itself has stated in no uncertain terms that the extra tax isn't payable, and there's no suggestion that Irish tax law has been broken.

    Isn't it repayment of illegal state aid, not a tax collection issue?
    Maybe, but it still makes no sense. Imagine the court scene:

    "M'lud, the government has repeatedly stated that there was no illegal state aid, yet it has brought my client to this court in order to ask you to order repayment of illegal state aid which it denies ever existed..."

    Aint' gonna fly, it seems to me...
    The Irish lawyers could simply say that the EU law takes precedence and it has been settled at higher courts and the Irish courts are obliged to recognise the supremacy of EU law and not what the Irish government wanted.
    But was Apple unique or in theory could any corporate body have done what they did? That's the bit I can't get info on.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited August 2016


    That is good to know - and perhaps things have moved on since I last looked into this

    But £1350 for a couple of emails from your tutor is hardly good value

    When I went abroad for a year I got more money for my loan, but it may be different if you are working and get a wage.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Hasn't that been the case pretty much since their economy collapsed? I don't know whether the 'observers' are still in situ or not but officially and unofficially the EU still holds about 75% of Ireland's debts on the ECB balance sheets.
    Ireland is constrained by the EU - Ireland has agreements with the EU. Apple has agreements with Ireland. The EU wishes to be an adult rushing in and saying that no matter what the silly children did its time for the adults.

    Ireland is being dismissed as an irrelevance.

    Perhaps there's another way of looking at this, but if I was Irish I think I'd be pretty upset.
    Strikes me as another salami slice power grab by the EU to gnaw away at the nation state and acquire power for itself without anyone having voted for it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    The state aid rules require the repayment of state aid: and that means the company that recieved the state aid (usually a French conglomerate who needed bailing out) has to have an embarassing rights issue and hand the money back,

    What is unique about this case is that historically state aid has been defined as the government giving money to a company. In this case, it is about the government offering a company a tax advantage.

    It bears repeating, of course, that there are anti state aid rules in NAFTA and other free trade agreements.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Omnium said:

    Ireland is constrained by the EU - Ireland has agreements with the EU. Apple has agreements with Ireland. The EU wishes to be an adult rushing in and saying that no matter what the silly children did its time for the adults.

    Ireland is being dismissed as an irrelevance.

    Perhaps there's another way of looking at this, but if I was Irish I think I'd be pretty upset.

    This story might explain Brexit to the Americans better than everything else, they seem to be surprised that the EU has such powers.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Because Apple trades within the EU and is subject to EU laws including bans on State Aid that were agreed and ratified by all nation states.

    Not to say that this decision was right or wrong, or whether it was made for the right or wrong reasons. But on the question of can the EU fine Apple the answer is an unequivocal yes.
    Apple didn't make that agreement, Ireland did.

    The EU is just bullying for 13bn of protection money. It simply isn't a legitimate claim in my view. An agreement was made, and no matter how faulty that agreement was assuming that the people who made it were legitimately empowered to do such a thing it must stand.

    Apple, and all the rest of the big corporations should pay their fair share of tax, but the rule of law (and a reasonable law) is more important.

  • Parliamentary expenses should be scrapped and MPs trusted with an allowance, says top Corbyn ally

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/30/parliamentary-expenses-should-be-scrapped-and-mps-trusted-with-a/
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Because Apple trades within the EU and is subject to EU laws including bans on State Aid that were agreed and ratified by all nation states.

    Not to say that this decision was right or wrong, or whether it was made for the right or wrong reasons. But on the question of can the EU fine Apple the answer is an unequivocal yes.
    Apple didn't make that agreement, Ireland did.

    The EU is just bullying for 13bn of protection money. It simply isn't a legitimate claim in my view. An agreement was made, and no matter how faulty that agreement was assuming that the people who made it were legitimately empowered to do such a thing it must stand.

    Apple, and all the rest of the big corporations should pay their fair share of tax, but the rule of law (and a reasonable law) is more important.
    Isn't this precisely what the commission is questioning?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Hasn't that been the case pretty much since their economy collapsed? I don't know whether the 'observers' are still in situ or not but officially and unofficially the EU still holds about 75% of Ireland's debts on the ECB balance sheets.
    That's not true any more.

    Ireland's government debt-to-GDP has collapsed from 124% in 2013 to about 90% today. As the banks are privatised and the assets of NAMA are sold off, that should drop to around 60%. Add in a little bit of economic growth between now and 2020, and it'll be back below 50%.

    Quite an extraordinary round trip.
  • nunu said:
    Says real estate mogul....
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    The Irish lawyers could simply say that the EU law takes precedence and it has been settled at higher courts and the Irish courts are obliged to recognise the supremacy of EU law and not what the Irish government wanted.

    IANAL, but I very much doubt that that would work in an Irish court. If EU law automatically takes precedence irrespective of domestic law (which it may do, I'm not sure), that's fine as far as interpretation of the law is concerned, but it doesn't get you very far in respect of this particular case. After all, neither potential plaintiff nor defendant is arguing that illegal state aid is OK, they both argue that this wasn't illegal state aid. That's very different from a case where one side or the other relies on EU law in order to win its case against the other.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    How can the EU fine Apple? I can understand fining Ireland, but Apple just made an agreement and paid their taxes.

    The EU is basically saying that Ireland isn't allowed outside the play-pen.

    I've no idea how we as the UK will fare in the the next few years, but there will be one big plus in leaving the actual institution of the EU behind.

    Hasn't that been the case pretty much since their economy collapsed? I don't know whether the 'observers' are still in situ or not but officially and unofficially the EU still holds about 75% of Ireland's debts on the ECB balance sheets.
    Ireland is constrained by the EU - Ireland has agreements with the EU. Apple has agreements with Ireland. The EU wishes to be an adult rushing in and saying that no matter what the silly children did its time for the adults.

    Ireland is being dismissed as an irrelevance.

    Perhaps there's another way of looking at this, but if I was Irish I think I'd be pretty upset.
    The only really outrageous thing is that Ireland get to keep the money.

This discussion has been closed.