The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
I've made this point before but 53 no-deal pounds is less than 47 extend-or-revoke pounds, so this market is pointing at the exit happening by Oct 31st.
Does this interpretation hold? Couldn't you simply hedge the FX impact of deal/no deal, rendering the payout under the two outcomes independent of the value of GBP? In other words, if you are betting USD then whether you choose to make the bet just on the Brexit outcome or a combined bet on Brexit plus the value of GBPUSD is up to you, and so the Brexit portion of the bet should be a clean measure of subjective probabilities.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Well its not panic.
Win/win for the government. If the EU blinks they win overwhelmingly and Boris is a hero. If the EU doesn't we want the EU to be the intransigent bad guys. Either way it works.
I think panic is setting in because a) the EU aren't blinking and b) it's not entirely clear that parliament will be able to stop No Deal, especially if Jezza refuses to play ball. Boris is now facing a nightmare scenario: a No Deal horror show that he swanned around the country acting gung-ho about because he thought it would never happen.
I've made this point before but 53 no-deal pounds is less than 47 extend-or-revoke pounds, so this market is pointing at the exit happening by Oct 31st.
Does this interpretation hold? Couldn't you simply hedge the FX impact of deal/no deal, rendering the payout under the two outcomes independent of the value of GBP? In other words, if you are betting USD then whether you choose to make the bet just on the Brexit outcome or a combined bet on Brexit plus the value of GBPUSD is up to you, and so the Brexit portion of the bet should be a clean measure of subjective probabilities.
It only makes sense for someone betting from abroad and place their stake in £. Which must be a tiny minority of the Uk betting market.
Looks like we are heading toward crossover. Wasn't it a lot less likely than this previously?
I don't think Boris is bluffing. The other question is can Parliament override Boris and that is looking increasingly unlikely.
The final question is if the EU is bluffing. Its going to be interesting to see the shoe on the other foot as we hold all the cards now and aren't folding, we are going All In. The EU can insist to their dying breath that the backstop remains, in which case there's No Deal, a hard border, no backstop and they've failed. Or they can fold, agree a transition without a backstop and keep an open border and settle the Irish border in the future negotiations where it should have been settled all along.
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
The game doesn't end on 31st October, Philip. It just gets harder for the UK to play. On 1st November we will become totally reliant on the goodwill of others to keep our economy moving, our shops fully stocked, our hospitals supplied with medicines, our planes in the air, and so on. The EU and the Irish government will also have the ability to decide how quickly they move to a Hard Border in Ireland in the full knowledge that it is the hard borders created at the Channel ports and at our airports that actually matter to the UK. Once we have thrown our cards onto the table on Halloween everyone will be able to see them and nobody will be able to pretend they are aces when, in fact, they are jokers.
Or they can fold, agree a transition without a backstop and keep an open border and settle the Irish border in the future negotiations where it should have been settled all along.
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
Or the ERG et al could have folded, agreed a transition with a backstop and kept an open border and settled the Irish border to replace the backstop (easily, with technology - or so they say!) in the future negotiations.
The ERG's stance was always illogical, if the technological solutions exist or will soon exist to have an open border in Ireland without a customs union then the backstop was a non-issue.
Bollocks. To paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: "All solutions are made up. They're not found in nature. No one digs on the ground and finds a rich vein of technological solutions."
If the EU don't want a technological solution we can't compel them to agree to it. If however they're desperate for one, they will agree to it, because necessity is the mother of invention. What is lacking is not technology, it is goodwill and compromise.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
How many avoidable deaths would you regard as an acceptable number to secure no deal Brexit?
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
To paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: "All solutions are made up. They're not found in nature. No one digs on the ground and finds a rich vein of technological solutions."
That is, in fact, bollocks.
Many "technological solutions" existed in nature before being "invented" by man.
Spiders have been using the under-slung chassis for millennia, as an example...
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
A Brexit that made us poorer and entirely dependent on the goodwill of others was always possible. Now the government has decided that’s what it wants.
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
I don't think this is quite fair.
The EU has a position: these are the rules of the club, if you want to benefit from the club you have to accept them all. That seems reasonable. The problem is the UK says we don't like some of the rules, but we want to keep the benefits. We want to say no freedom of movement, but still allow freedom of goods and services.
The issue is the history of Ireland. In an attempt to protect a member state the EU have said the Irish Border issue is as important as any of their usual rules. To try to ameliorate that issue for peace they bent on the rules: the backstop is essentially freedom of goods and services with an opt out for people. The EU hate that, but were willing to do it for Irish peace. May failed to sell it, and the loonies sold it as vassaldom.
If Ireland was not an issue, I think the EU (specifically France) would have already told us where to stick it. From the EU point of view, May's deal is already the EU giving away lots. It's just that many people in the UK have such a narrow view of foreign policy, especially when it comes to the EU, they refuse to recognise it.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
Retail sales volume is up 3.8% Y o Y, according to the ONS.
Mike et. al, I don't think it's simply that the markets believe Johnson / Cummings are bluffing.
It's that they doubt their competency to achieve No Deal.
In other words, even if they are by now deadly serious about achieving No Deal, that doesn't mean they can. There are lots of impediments. I don't think anyone really considers that a PM would succeed in holding out against a Vote of No Confidence for 8 weeks from 04th September to 31st October.
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
How many avoidable deaths would you regard as an acceptable number to secure no deal Brexit?
There is no answer to that question. We'll both never know if there are any deats due to Brexit, deaths vary every year and I expect a bad winter flu season will be worse.
Secondly, there is no death toll that makes sacrificing democracy acceptable.
Finally I don't want a no deal Brexit, my preference is a backstopless deal Brexit. My order of preference, as stated her before is:
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
A Brexit that made us poorer and entirely dependent on the goodwill of others was always possible. Now the government has decided that’s what it wants.
No, it wants to be stopped, but may have gambled rather heavily on the competence and co-ordination of the opposition.
I suspect the days immediately following a No Deal Brexit will be less catastrophic then feared, if only because the government will do everything it can to avoid chaos, knowing that these will be the crucial days at least as far as the press is concerned. It will want to crow that this was overstated Project Fear once again and hope to move on.
But it will be in the weeks and months after that the damage will show itself - in lost opportunities, in problems with data sharing, in cross-border criminal inquiries being slowed down or stymied, in rules on financial services being interpreted in such a way as to make London less and less attractive, etc etc, in the slow leakage of jobs and investment and tax revenues.
It will be in the realisation that the EU is not after all in a great hurry to enter into an FTA with a government that has acted in bad faith and no little spite, in the realisation that in trade deals with other countries the UK will be more of a beggar than a chooser, in the realisation that the US’s idea of a great trade deal is one which benefits the US, in the realisation that NI issues will once again occupy a government’s time and be as apparently insoluble as before, in the realisation that all those problems which were ignored are still there and will mot have been made any easier - indeed may have been made harder- as a result of Brexit. And so on.
And one day the government will realise that getting Brexit done does not bring it quite the electoral rewards it had been hoping for because voters, the ungrateful bastards, will pocket Brexit and then moan about all these other issue and those who hate Brexit will never forgive them.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Well its not panic.
Win/win for the government. If the EU blinks they win overwhelmingly and Boris is a hero. If the EU doesn't we want the EU to be the intransigent bad guys. Either way it works.
I think panic is setting in because a) the EU aren't blinking and b) it's not entirely clear that parliament will be able to stop No Deal, especially if Jezza refuses to play ball. Boris is now facing a nightmare scenario: a No Deal horror show that he swanned around the country acting gung-ho about because he thought it would never happen.
The EU have a further card to play in that they can still offer an (even unlimited) extension subject only to UK agreement which then places the ball firmly back in our court.
BTW can anyone remember what we are offering the EU to replace the backstop?
Well quite. That “once in a generation” thing was an off the cuff remark. Doesn’t stop it being a favourite Unionist meme.
Off the cuff? It was in the fucking whitepaper.
Scott - Has your own view on Scottish independence changed at all due to Brexit? Would you consider supporting it in the event of No Deal, for example?
Scott was all for Indy ref II on 24/06/16. His view changed after the panic receded.
I've made this point before but 53 no-deal pounds is less than 47 extend-or-revoke pounds, so this market is pointing at the exit happening by Oct 31st.
Does this interpretation hold? Couldn't you simply hedge the FX impact of deal/no deal, rendering the payout under the two outcomes independent of the value of GBP? In other words, if you are betting USD then whether you choose to make the bet just on the Brexit outcome or a combined bet on Brexit plus the value of GBPUSD is up to you, and so the Brexit portion of the bet should be a clean measure of subjective probabilities.
It only makes sense for someone betting from abroad and place their stake in £. Which must be a tiny minority of the Uk betting market.
It makes sense for anyone concerned about the value of GBP under the two scenarios. Even if you are UK based. The point I was trying to make was that it was mistaken to view the odds as skewed by the exchange rate implications of Brexit, because those implications could be hedged against when placing the bet. That is my contention anyway, I might be wrong.
Here are five key post-debate takeaways: There was no outright winner: After the first debates in June, Kamala Harris gained 6 points in vote share - a significant step forward for her campaign. This round, no candidate made a similar gain, and the shape of the race remains largely unchanged. Voters were more impressed by progressives than moderates: Twenty-two percent of voters say Elizabeth Warren had the best debate performance, and 15 percent said Bernie Sanders did – making them first and second in that regard. Harris’s performance set her back: Along with losing 3 points in vote share, Harris’s net favorability dropped by 11 points (seven points more than any other candidate). Biden didn’t make gains, but he weathered attacks: Despite facing criticisms from competitors all night, Biden held steady in terms of favorability and vote share. Williamson and Delaney made impressions (for better or worse): The share of voters who registered an opinion for each candidate increased by 9 points this week - the largest such jump. Williamson’s favorability increased by 6 points, while her unfavorability rose by 3. Delaney’s favorability rose by 4, and his unfavorability rose by 5.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Dear absolute God in Heaven above. I have been saying for over two years that 'failing and blaming" is a deliberate policy and now you're surprised??? What is the point of me being infinitely wise and prescient if nobody listens?...
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
How many avoidable deaths would you regard as an acceptable number to secure no deal Brexit?
There is no answer to that question. We'll both never know if there are any deats due to Brexit, deaths vary every year and I expect a bad winter flu season will be worse.
Secondly, there is no death toll that makes sacrificing democracy acceptable.
Finally I don't want a no deal Brexit, my preference is a backstopless deal Brexit. My order of preference, as stated her before is:
Good deal > No Deal > Revoke > Bad Deal.
The backstop is not sacrificing democracy. Proroguing Parliament, which you are cool with, to impose no deal Brexit would be sacrificing democracy. So what you wrote is your usual unhinged rubbish.
I suspect the days immediately following a No Deal Brexit will be less catastrophic then feared, if only because the government will do everything it can to avoid chaos, knowing that these will be the crucial days at least as far as the press is concerned. It will want to crow that this was overstated Project Fear once again and hope to move on.
But it will be in the weeks and months after that the damage will show itself - in lost opportunities, in problems with data sharing, in cross-border criminal inquiries being slowed down or stymied, in rules on financial services being interpreted in such a way as to make London less and less attractive, etc etc, in the slow leakage of jobs and investment and tax revenues.
It will be in the realisation that the EU is not after all in a great hurry to enter into an FTA with a government that has acted in bad faith and no little spite, in the realisation that in trade deals with other countries the UK will be more of a beggar than a chooser, in the realisation that the US’s idea of a great trade deal is one which benefits the US, in the realisation that NI issues will once again occupy a government’s time and be as apparently insoluble as before, in the realisation that all those problems which were ignored are still there and will mot have been made any easier - indeed may have been made harder- as a result of Brexit. And so on.
And one day the government will realise that getting Brexit done does not bring it quite the electoral rewards it had been hoping for because voters, the ungrateful bastards, will pocket Brexit and then moan about all these other issue and those who hate Brexit will never forgive them.
And the moment we really need something from the EU and their response is: “now, about that 39 billion...”
We Brexit on Halloween, November will be full of stories of chaos. Helicopters flying over Kent filming the traffic. December however is Christmas. People are too distracted with their own lives, bothered by presents and family and life shuts down anyway. Many plants shut down between Christmas and New Year, traffic becomes about meeting family. Then we get to the New Year and we move on with new beginnings.
At Christmas they can't buy presents, or food, and the family can't visit because the roads are blocked.
Peak chaos
But the roads free of Irish HGVs using England as a cheap rat run.
The only way the Irish won't be using us a rat run will be because Kent is a car park..
Tough luck for the citizens of Kent. Life goes on for everyone else.
It's the care and consideration that Brexiteers display for their fellow citizens that really makes me well up.
Kent overwhelmingly voted for Brexit despite pre-referendum warnings they would be at the frontline of any chaos. A little bit of traffic isn't reason to panic.
"It was quite simply a very bad plan right from the start."
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
Things are not going your way plus there is a gap in your understanding so I will explain the issue of the backstop.
As OGH noted this morning, the Good Friday Agreement effectively put a stop to the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland (and the mainland). Included in its measures was the dismantling of border posts which had acted as a lightning conductor for that violence. Here is a picture of one such border post in case you thought they were manned by solitary HM Customs, Swiss-type blokes in a peaked cap and clipboard.
The fear is that if customs checks are required then such edifices will have to be remantled.
The British Government, which Theresa May appreciated and BoJo may or may not have realised, does not want to get into a situation whereby it might be forced to apply checks on the NI border. As you have said many times, neither the EU nor we want it but it might come about via a WTO MFN challenge by a third country.
Theresa May's government took that possibility seriously enough to institute and agree a backstop so that no such challenge could occur. The mere possibility that such border infrastructure would be required was enough to require the backstop to avoid it. And May understood that. She realised that no British PM could preside over a resumption of the Troubles.
What Boris thinks is of course anyone's guess. My own is that the above will have been spelled out to him carefully by anyone he is prepared to listen to and that he, like May, will act upon that information.
But the issue is that no British government can afford to leave the EU without a backstop.
Looks like we are heading toward crossover. Wasn't it a lot less likely than this previously?
I don't think Boris is bluffing. The other question is can Parliament override Boris and that is looking increasingly unlikely.
The final question is if the EU is bluffing. Its going to be interesting to see the shoe on the other foot as we hold all the cards now and aren't folding, we are going All In. The EU can insist to their dying breath that the backstop remains, in which case there's No Deal, a hard border, no backstop and they've failed. Or they can fold, agree a transition without a backstop and keep an open border and settle the Irish border in the future negotiations where it should have been settled all along.
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
The game doesn't end on 31st October, Philip. It just gets harder for the UK to play. On 1st November we will become totally reliant on the goodwill of others to keep our economy moving, our shops fully stocked, our hospitals supplied with medicines, our planes in the air, and so on. The EU and the Irish government will also have the ability to decide how quickly they move to a Hard Border in Ireland in the full knowledge that it is the hard borders created at the Channel ports and at our airports that actually matter to the UK. Once we have thrown our cards onto the table on Halloween everyone will be able to see them and nobody will be able to pretend they are aces when, in fact, they are jokers.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Well its not panic.
Win/win for the government. If the EU blinks they win overwhelmingly and Boris is a hero. If the EU doesn't we want the EU to be the intransigent bad guys. Either way it works.
I think panic is setting in because a) the EU aren't blinking and b) it's not entirely clear that parliament will be able to stop No Deal, especially if Jezza refuses to play ball. Boris is now facing a nightmare scenario: a No Deal horror show that he swanned around the country acting gung-ho about because he thought it would never happen.
But did he really expect the EU to blink? There really was no evidence for that belief. Indeed the EU has been consistent. And as regards Parliament, well, nowt has changed there. They haven't even been sitting. If panic is setting in, and I think that remains unproven, then it probably has more to do with newly appointed insouciant Brexiter Ministers being presented bŷ civil servants with the full real world implications of the policy they have breezily touted. And a head on meeting with just how much has yet to be done. Hence the toute suite appointment of new advisers.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
Retail sales volume is up 3.8% Y o Y, according to the ONS.
How many more people were there in the UK, including tourists, in July 2019 as against July 2018. And what's normal change in July? Bald figures never actually mean very much!
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
Things are not going your way plus there is a gap in your understanding so I will explain the issue of the backstop.
As OGH noted this morning, the Good Friday Agreement effectively put a stop to the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland (and the mainland). Included in its measures was the dismantling of border posts which had acted as a lightning conductor for that violence. Here is a picture of one such border post in case you thought they were manned by solitary HM Customs, Swiss-type blokes in a peaked cap and clipboard.
The fear is that if customs checks are required then such edifices will have to be remantled.
The British Government, which Theresa May appreciated and BoJo may or may not have realised, does not want to get into a situation whereby it might be forced to apply checks on the NI border. As you have said many times, neither the EU nor we want it but it might come about via a WTO MFN challenge by a third country.
Theresa May's government took that possibility seriously enough to institute and agree a backstop so that no such challenge could occur. The mere possibility that such border infrastructure would be required was enough to require the backstop to avoid it. And May understood that. She realised that no British PM could preside over a resumption of the Troubles.
What Boris thinks is of course anyone's guess. My own is that the above will have been spelled out to him carefully by anyone he is prepared to listen to and that he, like May, will act upon that information.
But the issue is that no British government can afford to leave the EU without a backstop.
Will we leave without one? We will see.
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
Good luck to you but personally I have largely lost the will to engage in reasoned argument on this site, which I once valued as a mirror of diverse political opinion. It's become one on which the overwhelming majority are Remainers too many of whom routinely hurl insults as anyone who dares to disagree with them. They are increasingly talking to themselves, which is what I think they want. This thread is a good example.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Dear absolute God in Heaven above. I have been saying for over two years that 'failing and blaming" is a deliberate policy and now you're surprised??? What is the point of me being infinitely wise and prescient if nobody listens?...
It never pays to be correct too early before anyone else.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Well its not panic.
Win/win for the government. If the EU blinks they win overwhelmingly and Boris is a hero. If the EU doesn't we want the EU to be the intransigent bad guys. Either way it works.
I think panic is setting in because a) the EU aren't blinking and b) it's not entirely clear that parliament will be able to stop No Deal, especially if Jezza refuses to play ball. Boris is now facing a nightmare scenario: a No Deal horror show that he swanned around the country acting gung-ho about because he thought it would never happen.
But did he really expect the EU to blink? There really was no evidence for that belief. Indeed the EU has been consistent. And as regards Parliament, well, nowt has changed there. They haven't even been sitting. If panic is setting in, and I think that remains unproven, then it probably has more to do with newly appointed insouciant Brexiter Ministers being presented bŷ civil servants with the full real world implications of the policy they have breezily touted. And a head on meeting with just how much has yet to be done. Hence the toute suite appointment of new advisers.
I don't see much sign of panic. I think Boris is simply daring the Commons to vote him down before 31st October. Not all opposition MP's may be happy to do so, depending on their attitude towards Jeremy Corbyn, and the state of the polling.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Dear absolute God in Heaven above. I have been saying for over two years that 'failing and blaming" is a deliberate policy and now you're surprised??? What is the point of me being infinitely wise and prescient if nobody listens?...
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Dear absolute God in Heaven above. I have been saying for over two years that 'failing and blaming" is a deliberate policy and now you're surprised??? What is the point of me being infinitely wise and prescient if nobody listens?...
It never pays to be correct too early before anyone else.
OTOH It pays to be first to the exit in the case of a stampede.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
Retail sales volume is up 3.8% Y o Y, according to the ONS.
How many more people were there in the UK, including tourists, in July 2019 as against July 2018. And what's normal change in July? Bald figures never actually mean very much!
It's the quarter to July of this year, compared to the quarter to July of last year, which irons out big monthly changes.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
Retail sales volume is up 3.8% Y o Y, according to the ONS.
How many more people were there in the UK, including tourists, in July 2019 as against July 2018. And what's normal change in July? Bald figures never actually mean very much!
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
How many avoidable deaths would you regard as an acceptable number to secure no deal Brexit?
There is no answer to that question. We'll both never know if there are any deats due to Brexit, deaths vary every year and I expect a bad winter flu season will be worse.
Secondly, there is no death toll that makes sacrificing democracy acceptable.
Finally I don't want a no deal Brexit, my preference is a backstopless deal Brexit. My order of preference, as stated her before is:
Good deal > No Deal > Revoke > Bad Deal.
The backstop is not sacrificing democracy. Proroguing Parliament, which you are cool with, to impose no deal Brexit would be sacrificing democracy. So what you wrote is your usual unhinged rubbish.
For Christ’s sake, Alastair, don’t trigger him! We’ll end up with a replay of the really unhinged posts about how Britain in the backstop is in a worse position than Ireland under the British yoke in, ooh, about 1845. And I don’t think I could go through that again, not without a stiff drink anyway.
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
Another one who presumably wilfully doesn't understand the history or politics of Northern Ireland (or perhaps anywhere else).
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
Another one who presumably wilfully doesn't understand the history or politics of Northern Ireland (or perhaps anywhere else).
What has that got to do with pointing out factually incorrect statements?
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
Why not simply revoke and go back to the status quo ante? Or Cameron’s Deal?
And please don’t lump me in with everyone else. You’ve been consistent pompous since the start, regardless of the position you’ve adopted, which has continually racked, like a female John Bercow.
You just like to think you’re cleverer and smarter than everyone else. Maybe you are, but it grates. And I’m rather tired of it and your (whilst always eloquent and well-written) shotgun rants.
Rachel Riley has slammed a Labour councillor for endorsing an article which claimed the Countdown presenter was 'working for the Israeli state propaganda machine'.
Newly-elected Southbourne councillor Lisa Lewis was called out by Ms Riley after she endorsed a Dorset Eye report calling the star a 'pointless, poisonous celebrity'.
The article claimed Ms Riley 'and her goons' will be responsible for 'another Jo Cox moment' by calling out anti-Semitism in the party, referring to the MP's 2016 murder.
I think the cards really are on the table now though.
EU:We won't re-open WA UK:We'll only negotiate if you take out the backstop from WA
EU & UK together:No deal Brexit it is then.
They said it couldn't be done. Many have tried and failed. But this proud nation is going to leave the EU. Thank fuck for that and we can all get on with our lives (like #indyref2)
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
I don't think this is quite fair.
The EU has a position: these are the rules of the club, if you want to benefit from the club you have to accept them all. That seems reasonable. The problem is the UK says we don't like some of the rules, but we want to keep the benefits. We want to say no freedom of movement, but still allow freedom of goods and services.
The issue is the history of Ireland. In an attempt to protect a member state the EU have said the Irish Border issue is as important as any of their usual rules. To try to ameliorate that issue for peace they bent on the rules: the backstop is essentially freedom of goods and services with an opt out for people. The EU hate that, but were willing to do it for Irish peace. May failed to sell it, and the loonies sold it as vassaldom.
If Ireland was not an issue, I think the EU (specifically France) would have already told us where to stick it. From the EU point of view, May's deal is already the EU giving away lots. It's just that many people in the UK have such a narrow view of foreign policy, especially when it comes to the EU, they refuse to recognise it.
That's true insofar as it goes for Remainers like May and Robbins keeping the benefits of the EU while ending free movement is a fantastic deal.
However despite the belief of May and the protestations of Mr Meeks, Brexit was for us about more than just migration. If Brexit is about more than just migration, this is not a fantastic deal.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
It's only a surrender if you think the objective in the first place was to resist European integration rather than to choose the best future for this country from a range of possibilities.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
GDP rose by 1.4%, so it has fallen in relation to this.
I think the cards really are on the table now though.
EU:We won't re-open WA UK:We'll only negotiate if you take out the backstop from WA
EU & UK together:No deal Brexit it is then.
They said it couldn't be done. Many have tried and failed. But this proud nation is going to leave the EU. Thank fuck for that and we can all get on with our lives (like #indyref2)
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
GDP rose by 1.4%, so it has fallen in relation to this.
Yet that wasn’t the claim. A dip in production suggests an absolute decrease.
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
Another one who presumably wilfully doesn't understand the history or politics of Northern Ireland (or perhaps anywhere else).
What has that got to do with pointing out factually incorrect statements?
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
Good luck to you but personally I have largely lost the will to engage in reasoned argument on this site, which I once valued as a mirror of diverse political opinion. It's become one on which the overwhelming majority are Remainers too many of whom routinely hurl insults as anyone who dares to disagree with them. They are increasingly talking to themselves, which is what I think they want. This thread is a good example.
Last month the worst month for retail sales since records began twenty years ago.
And another dip in car production.
Just to clarify (from the FT):
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
So another dip is in fact a rise? Interesting.
Retail sales volume is up 3.8% Y o Y, according to the ONS.
How many more people were there in the UK, including tourists, in July 2019 as against July 2018. And what's normal change in July? Bald figures never actually mean very much!
The recession has started in private sector investment which is the area most likely to be affected by Brexit. So far consumers and Government have kept spending. This is on borrowed money from abroad as we run a current account deficit.
The next step is probably a squeeze on consumers as imported inflation hits.
The Government seems completely unaware on how to maintain production capacity in the UK to stop the country becoming fully dependent on foreigners. On a quick calculation I estimate that 80% of UK medtech capacity is now controlled outside the UK. Most of this capacity is treating Brexit as a threat and not an opportunity to grow. Unless this changes investment will stay low and the currency will continue to fall.
Rachel Riley has slammed a Labour councillor for endorsing an article which claimed the Countdown presenter was 'working for the Israeli state propaganda machine'.
Newly-elected Southbourne councillor Lisa Lewis was called out by Ms Riley after she endorsed a Dorset Eye report calling the star a 'pointless, poisonous celebrity'.
The article claimed Ms Riley 'and her goons' will be responsible for 'another Jo Cox moment' by calling out anti-Semitism in the party, referring to the MP's 2016 murder.
It will be in the realisation that the EU is not after all in a great hurry to enter into an FTA with a government that has acted in bad faith and no little spite, in the realisation that in trade deals with other countries the UK will be more of a beggar than a chooser, in the realisation that the US’s idea of a great trade deal is one which benefits the US, in the realisation that NI issues will once again occupy a government’s time and be as apparently insoluble as before, in the realisation that all those problems which were ignored are still there and will mot have been made any easier - indeed may have been made harder- as a result of Brexit. And so on.
One thing I hope (but doubt) will enter political consciousness is that "Trade Deals" are not remotely the be-all and end-all of trading. You make stuff people want to buy, they'll buy it - trade deal (which makes it easier) or no. Will the sale of Rolls Royce Aero engines to EU members end after Brexit? Unlikely (in fact it would be a disaster for Airbus as some types are only certified with RR engines). What we need to do (and conspicuously fail at) is educate our young properly (and not just the top 10%) so they make and invent the stuff the world wants to buy. Then they'll buy it.
This fetishisation of "Trade Deals" has been one of the Brexiteers dumber mistakes (among stiff competition).
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
I don't think this is quite fair.
The EU has a position: these are the rules of the club, if you want to benefit from the club you have to accept them all. That seems reasonable. The problem is the UK says we don't like some of the rules, but we want to keep the benefits. We want to say no freedom of movement, but still allow freedom of goods and services.
The issue is the history of Ireland. In an attempt to protect a member state the EU have said the Irish Border issue is as important as any of their usual rules. To try to ameliorate that issue for peace they bent on the rules: the backstop is essentially freedom of goods and services with an opt out for people. The EU hate that, but were willing to do it for Irish peace. May failed to sell it, and the loonies sold it as vassaldom.
If Ireland was not an issue, I think the EU (specifically France) would have already told us where to stick it. From the EU point of view, May's deal is already the EU giving away lots. It's just that many people in the UK have such a narrow view of foreign policy, especially when it comes to the EU, they refuse to recognise it.
That's true insofar as it goes for Remainers like May and Robbins keeping the benefits of the EU while ending free movement is a fantastic deal.
However despite the belief of May and the protestations of Mr Meeks, Brexit was for us about more than just migration. If Brexit is about more than just migration, this is not a fantastic deal.
But it was a stepping stone. You go from being in the EU with all that entails, to being out of the EU with a few strings, to eventually getting rid of the strings. To cut all the strings at once with no safety net.
Hmm. Either this a concerted attempt by the government to paint the EU as the intransigent bad guys or panic is starting to set in.
Well its not panic.
Win/win for the government. If the EU blinks they win overwhelmingly and Boris is a hero. If the EU doesn't we want the EU to be the intransigent bad guys. Either way it works.
I think panic is setting in because a) the EU aren't blinking and b) it's not entirely clear that parliament will be able to stop No Deal, especially if Jezza refuses to play ball. Boris is now facing a nightmare scenario: a No Deal horror show that he swanned around the country acting gung-ho about because he thought it would never happen.
The EU have a further card to play in that they can still offer an (even unlimited) extension subject only to UK agreement which then places the ball firmly back in our court.
BTW can anyone remember what we are offering the EU to replace the backstop?
We are offering to enter into an immediate transition period that keeps the Irish border open and to negotiate the future during the future negotiations as part of the transition. Problem solved.
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
Another one who presumably wilfully doesn't understand the history or politics of Northern Ireland (or perhaps anywhere else).
What has that got to do with pointing out factually incorrect statements?
But by all means tell me that it has nothing to do with the GFA. You think you are being clever, clever but you are actually being a dick.
Charming. Just pointing out that there are no such provisions in the text of the agreement as you had claimed. And I think an army observation post is a bit different from a customs border, which is the current point of contention.
Safest of safe havens ? Swiss 50 year bond yield is now negative.
Man the lifeboats. Women and children first.
Noel Coward reputedly preferred the French Line "None of this women & children first nonsense"
When Titanic went down, it was actually neither Third Class nor First Class chaps who suffered the most casualties, percentage-wise. It was actually the Second Class men.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
It's only a surrender if you think the objective in the first place was to resist European integration rather than to choose the best future for this country from a range of possibilities.
The best future for this country will never involve joining the Euro and Schengen. It suits neither our economic interests nor our political interests and was settled long before Brexit came a long as a debate.
You’re a fanatic, so you’ll always advocate for it, but just because leaving absolutely everything overnight doesn’t make sense neither does joining absolutely everything either.
It’s pretty obvious that a semi-detached position for the UK has always been the sweet spot.
The EU are not the bad guys, and the public knows it.
You've lost and the public knows it.
Suck it up, buttercup.
We are all the losers thanks to thick wankers like yourself.
You may be losing but I feel like I'm winning. I've been an almost lone voice on this site over the last 12 months arguing against the backstop. Now things are finally going the way I feel like I was almost uniquely arguing for. I'm quite content with that thank you very much.
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
How many avoidable deaths would you regard as an acceptable number to secure no deal Brexit?
There is no answer to that question. We'll both never know if there are any deats due to Brexit, deaths vary every year and I expect a bad winter flu season will be worse.
Secondly, there is no death toll that makes sacrificing democracy acceptable.
Finally I don't want a no deal Brexit, my preference is a backstopless deal Brexit. My order of preference, as stated her before is:
Good deal > No Deal > Revoke > Bad Deal.
The backstop is not sacrificing democracy. Proroguing Parliament, which you are cool with, to impose no deal Brexit would be sacrificing democracy. So what you wrote is your usual unhinged rubbish.
Proroguing Parliament would suspend democracy for a few weeks. The backstop terminates democracy forever. One is infinitely worse than the other and given you are perfectly fine with the undemocratic backstop, given you are fine with EU rules being applied to us but us having no MEPs or votes in Council to shape them, you complaining about a small proroguation is hilariously absurd.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
It's only a surrender if you think the objective in the first place was to resist European integration rather than to choose the best future for this country from a range of possibilities.
The best future for this country will never involve joining the Euro and Schengen. It suits neither our economic interests nor our political interests and was settled long before Brexit came a long as a debate.
You’re a fanatic, so you’ll always advocate for it, but just because leaving absolutely everything overnight doesn’t make sense neither does joining absolutely everything either.
It’s pretty obvious that a semi-detached position for the UK has always been the sweet spot.
The UK will not be around much longer. The sweet spot for the independent nations of Britain is full membership on the same terms as our neighbours.
@Philip_Thompson Are you using Jack Sparrow as your avatar at the moment because you're out on Fantasy Island ?
No, because people keep referring [as an insult] to Brexiteers wanting "Libertarian Pirate Island" and to me Libertarian Pirate Island sounds great. Ahoy mateys, buckle up and shiver me timbers.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
It's only a surrender if you think the objective in the first place was to resist European integration rather than to choose the best future for this country from a range of possibilities.
The best future for this country will never involve joining the Euro and Schengen. It suits neither our economic interests nor our political interests and was settled long before Brexit came a long as a debate.
You’re a fanatic, so you’ll always advocate for it, but just because leaving absolutely everything overnight doesn’t make sense neither does joining absolutely everything either.
It’s pretty obvious that a semi-detached position for the UK has always been the sweet spot.
The UK will not be around much longer. The sweet spot for the independent nations of Britain is full membership on the same terms as our neighbours.
The article lists a few of the issue which will arise post 31 October. If this is holding all the cards, I’d hate to think what a bad hand looks like.
And, yet, you’ve declared your total and unconditional surrender on the previous thread, and that you’d now join the Euro.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
No - I said I would consider it depending on whether / if Britain remained or rejoined and that old verities and assumptions would have to be questioned. When the facts change I try and rethink what I thought before. What do you do?
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
I change my mind too. But I see no basis for a complete volte face as an emotional reaction to spite some of the more extreme Brexiteers. You said you’d go “all in”, which would be total and unconditional surrender.
Why not simply revoke and go back to the status quo ante? Or Cameron’s Deal?
And please don’t lump me in with everyone else. You’ve been consistent pompous since the start, regardless of the position you’ve adopted, which has continually racked, like a female John Bercow.
You just like to think you’re cleverer and smarter than everyone else. Maybe you are, but it grates. And I’m rather tired of it and your (whilst always eloquent and well-written) shotgun rants.
I’ll ignore the personal abuse. A shame since from my brief meeting with you I rather liked you; and it is inconsistent with stuff you’ve written to and about me in the past. But as you say everyone can change their mind.
I think revoke can only happen after either a GE won by a party explicitly having this in their manifesto or a referendum to this effect - unlikely given the timing. The Cameron deal is no longer on offer.
I am rethinking my position on the euro. Not sure where I will end up. But the point is rather moot in any case.
It will be in the realisation that the EU is not after all in a great hurry to enter into an FTA with a government that has acted in bad faith and no little spite, in the realisation that in trade deals with other countries the UK will be more of a beggar than a chooser, in the realisation that the US’s idea of a great trade deal is one which benefits the US, in the realisation that NI issues will once again occupy a government’s time and be as apparently insoluble as before, in the realisation that all those problems which were ignored are still there and will mot have been made any easier - indeed may have been made harder- as a result of Brexit. And so on.
One thing I hope (but doubt) will enter political consciousness is that "Trade Deals" are not remotely the be-all and end-all of trading. You make stuff people want to buy, they'll buy it - trade deal (which makes it easier) or no. Will the sale of Rolls Royce Aero engines to EU members end after Brexit? Unlikely (in fact it would be a disaster for Airbus as some types are only certified with RR engines). What we need to do (and conspicuously fail at) is educate our young properly (and not just the top 10%) so they make and invent the stuff the world wants to buy. Then they'll buy it.
This fetishisation of "Trade Deals" has been one of the Brexiteers dumber mistakes (among stiff competition).
That is true. It applies particularly to the US, where we trade very successfully under current arrangements and will very probably lose out in any trade deal Trump would be willing to sign.
The GFA has provisions for the dismantling of border posts? Perhaps it happened at the same time, but I don’t see any text in the GFA forbidding customs checks, at the border or otherwise.
Another one who presumably wilfully doesn't understand the history or politics of Northern Ireland (or perhaps anywhere else).
What has that got to do with pointing out factually incorrect statements?
But by all means tell me that it has nothing to do with the GFA. You think you are being clever, clever but you are actually being a dick.
Charming. Just pointing out that there are no such provisions in the text of the agreement as you had claimed. And I think an army observation post is a bit different from a customs border, which is the current point of contention.
Jesus Fucking Christ I am trying to be reasonable here but it's like teaching a haddock how to ride a bicycle.
In the context of the Troubles every seemingly straightforward policing or enforcement action had to have a subsidiary full scale military operation around it. Hence you would get two RUC bobbies walking down the road, thumbs stuck in their tunics, with anything up to 28 soldiers patrolling around them plus helicopters plus other elements just so those two bobbies could walk down the road.
Same with police stations, observations posts, oh fuck it. Forget it. It's not worth the effort. Basically you have to sit on the triangle thing and then reach down with your feet to the pedals oh wait, you don't have feet...
The EU's stance was always illogical, the only defence to it was that they had so much strength that the UK had to fold. But it doesn't matter in poker if you are dominant chip leader, if your opposition goes All In you are forced to react.
I don't think this is quite fair.
The EU has a position: these are the rules of the club, if you want to benefit from the club you have to accept them all. That seems reasonable. The problem is the UK says we don't like some of the rules, but we want to keep the benefits. We want to say no freedom of movement, but still allow freedom of goods and services.
The issue is the history of Ireland. In an attempt to protect a member state the EU have said the Irish Border issue is as important as any of their usual rules. To try to ameliorate that issue for peace they bent on the rules: the backstop is essentially freedom of goods and services with an opt out for people. The EU hate that, but were willing to do it for Irish peace. May failed to sell it, and the loonies sold it as vassaldom.
If Ireland was not an issue, I think the EU (specifically France) would have already told us where to stick it. From the EU point of view, May's deal is already the EU giving away lots. It's just that many people in the UK have such a narrow view of foreign policy, especially when it comes to the EU, they refuse to recognise it.
That's true insofar as it goes for Remainers like May and Robbins keeping the benefits of the EU while ending free movement is a fantastic deal.
However despite the belief of May and the protestations of Mr Meeks, Brexit was for us about more than just migration. If Brexit is about more than just migration, this is not a fantastic deal.
But it was a stepping stone. You go from being in the EU with all that entails, to being out of the EU with a few strings, to eventually getting rid of the strings. To cut all the strings at once with no safety net.
Had it just been a transition then yes absolutely.
However the backstop is a trap. It wasn't a transition it was nailing down the future and not in a positive way.
I've made this point before but 53 no-deal pounds is less than 47 extend-or-revoke pounds, so this market is pointing at the exit happening by Oct 31st.
Does this interpretation hold? Couldn't you simply hedge the FX impact of deal/no deal, rendering the payout under the two outcomes independent of the value of GBP? In other words, if you are betting USD then whether you choose to make the bet just on the Brexit outcome or a combined bet on Brexit plus the value of GBPUSD is up to you, and so the Brexit portion of the bet should be a clean measure of subjective probabilities.
It only makes sense for someone betting from abroad and place their stake in £. Which must be a tiny minority of the Uk betting market.
It makes sense for anyone concerned about the value of GBP under the two scenarios. Even if you are UK based. The point I was trying to make was that it was mistaken to view the odds as skewed by the exchange rate implications of Brexit, because those implications could be hedged against when placing the bet. That is my contention anyway, I might be wrong.
The giveaway that there's something wonky is that if you had a USD market with the same odds as the UK market you'd have an arb, because you could put pounds on the UK extend/revoke market and dollars on the US No Deal market then end up with the same or more pounds whatever happened. This proves the USD and GBP markets should have different odds.
I think the cards really are on the table now though.
EU:We won't re-open WA UK:We'll only negotiate if you take out the backstop from WA
EU & UK together:No deal Brexit it is then.
They said it couldn't be done. Many have tried and failed. But this proud nation is going to leave the EU. Thank fuck for that and we can all get on with our lives (like #indyref2)
”This is one of the many awful ironies of Brexit. The people selling and voting for it shared some desire to reduce the role of “Europe” in our national life. In fact, leaving will only increase the time and energy we spend considering and constructing our relationships with the European Union. ”
Comments
If we manage to leave without a backstop then you heard it here first.
I can't believe ydoethur's puns are not butter than that.
And another dip in car production.
That’s just as pathetic. Just because you think you got the original decision slightly wrong doesn’t mean you turn the whole world upside down.
If the EU don't want a technological solution we can't compel them to agree to it. If however they're desperate for one, they will agree to it, because necessity is the mother of invention. What is lacking is not technology, it is goodwill and compromise.
The value of total sales increased by 0.3 per cent compared with July last year, the lowest figure for the month since records began in 1995, according to data from the British Retail Consortium, an industry lobby group, and the consultancy KPMG.
Many "technological solutions" existed in nature before being "invented" by man.
Spiders have been using the under-slung chassis for millennia, as an example...
The EU has a position: these are the rules of the club, if you want to benefit from the club you have to accept them all. That seems reasonable. The problem is the UK says we don't like some of the rules, but we want to keep the benefits. We want to say no freedom of movement, but still allow freedom of goods and services.
The issue is the history of Ireland. In an attempt to protect a member state the EU have said the Irish Border issue is as important as any of their usual rules. To try to ameliorate that issue for peace they bent on the rules: the backstop is essentially freedom of goods and services with an opt out for people. The EU hate that, but were willing to do it for Irish peace. May failed to sell it, and the loonies sold it as vassaldom.
If Ireland was not an issue, I think the EU (specifically France) would have already told us where to stick it. From the EU point of view, May's deal is already the EU giving away lots. It's just that many people in the UK have such a narrow view of foreign policy, especially when it comes to the EU, they refuse to recognise it.
It's that they doubt their competency to achieve No Deal.
In other words, even if they are by now deadly serious about achieving No Deal, that doesn't mean they can. There are lots of impediments. I don't think anyone really considers that a PM would succeed in holding out against a Vote of No Confidence for 8 weeks from 04th September to 31st October.
Secondly, there is no death toll that makes sacrificing democracy acceptable.
Finally I don't want a no deal Brexit, my preference is a backstopless deal Brexit. My order of preference, as stated her before is:
Good deal > No Deal > Revoke > Bad Deal.
But it will be in the weeks and months after that the damage will show itself - in lost opportunities, in problems with data sharing, in cross-border criminal inquiries being slowed down or stymied, in rules on financial services being interpreted in such a way as to make London less and less attractive, etc etc, in the slow leakage of jobs and investment and tax revenues.
It will be in the realisation that the EU is not after all in a great hurry to enter into an FTA with a government that has acted in bad faith and no little spite, in the realisation that in trade deals with other countries the UK will be more of a beggar than a chooser, in the realisation that the US’s idea of a great trade deal is one which benefits the US, in the realisation that NI issues will once again occupy a government’s time and be as apparently insoluble as before, in the realisation that all those problems which were ignored are still there and will mot have been made any easier - indeed may have been made harder- as a result of Brexit. And so on.
And one day the government will realise that getting Brexit done does not bring it quite the electoral rewards it had been hoping for because voters, the ungrateful bastards, will pocket Brexit and then moan about all these other issue and those who hate Brexit will never forgive them.
BTW can anyone remember what we are offering the EU to replace the backstop?
Here are five key post-debate takeaways:
There was no outright winner: After the first debates in June, Kamala Harris gained 6 points in vote share - a significant step forward for her campaign. This round, no candidate made a similar gain, and the shape of the race remains largely unchanged.
Voters were more impressed by progressives than moderates: Twenty-two percent of voters say Elizabeth Warren had the best debate performance, and 15 percent said Bernie Sanders did – making them first and second in that regard.
Harris’s performance set her back: Along with losing 3 points in vote share, Harris’s net favorability dropped by 11 points (seven points more than any other candidate).
Biden didn’t make gains, but he weathered attacks: Despite facing criticisms from competitors all night, Biden held steady in terms of favorability and vote share.
Williamson and Delaney made impressions (for better or worse): The share of voters who registered an opinion for each candidate increased by 9 points this week - the largest such jump.
Williamson’s favorability increased by 6 points, while her unfavorability rose by 3.
Delaney’s favorability rose by 4, and his unfavorability rose by 5.
I wonder what those betting on no departure on that date believe will happen.
As OGH noted this morning, the Good Friday Agreement effectively put a stop to the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland (and the mainland). Included in its measures was the dismantling of border posts which had acted as a lightning conductor for that violence. Here is a picture of one such border post in case you thought they were manned by solitary HM Customs, Swiss-type blokes in a peaked cap and clipboard.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/859388.stm
The fear is that if customs checks are required then such edifices will have to be remantled.
The British Government, which Theresa May appreciated and BoJo may or may not have realised, does not want to get into a situation whereby it might be forced to apply checks on the NI border. As you have said many times, neither the EU nor we want it but it might come about via a WTO MFN challenge by a third country.
Theresa May's government took that possibility seriously enough to institute and agree a backstop so that no such challenge could occur. The mere possibility that such border infrastructure would be required was enough to require the backstop to avoid it. And May understood that. She realised that no British PM could preside over a resumption of the Troubles.
What Boris thinks is of course anyone's guess. My own is that the above will have been spelled out to him carefully by anyone he is prepared to listen to and that he, like May, will act upon that information.
But the issue is that no British government can afford to leave the EU without a backstop.
Will we leave without one? We will see.
Still, interesting that you consider rethinking in the light of events to be “total and unconditional surrender”. That is quite revealing of a certain type of Brexiteer mindset but not of mine.
If panic is setting in, and I think that remains unproven, then it probably has more to do with newly appointed insouciant Brexiter Ministers being presented bŷ civil servants with the full real world implications of the policy they have breezily touted. And a head on meeting with just how much has yet to be done.
Hence the toute suite appointment of new advisers.
Bald figures never actually mean very much!
https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf
And that is the only way I have ever been any sort of Kipper.
Twice.
Noel Coward reputedly preferred the French Line "None of this women & children first nonsense"
Why not simply revoke and go back to the status quo ante? Or Cameron’s Deal?
And please don’t lump me in with everyone else. You’ve been consistent pompous since the start, regardless of the position you’ve adopted, which has continually racked, like a female John Bercow.
You just like to think you’re cleverer and smarter than everyone else. Maybe you are, but it grates. And I’m rather tired of it and your (whilst always eloquent and well-written) shotgun rants.
Newly-elected Southbourne councillor Lisa Lewis was called out by Ms Riley after she endorsed a Dorset Eye report calling the star a 'pointless, poisonous celebrity'.
The article claimed Ms Riley 'and her goons' will be responsible for 'another Jo Cox moment' by calling out anti-Semitism in the party, referring to the MP's 2016 murder.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7325919/Rachel-Riley-slams-Labour-councillor-endorsing-Jo-Cox-moment-article.html
A ship carrying Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton hits a rock and starts to sink.
'Get the women and children to the lifeboats!' shouts Carter.
'Screw the women and children,' snarls Nixon as he runs for the nearest lifeboat.
'Do you think we've got time?' asks Clinton.
I think the cards really are on the table now though.
EU:We won't re-open WA
UK:We'll only negotiate if you take out the backstop from WA
EU & UK together:No deal Brexit it is then.
They said it couldn't be done. Many have tried and failed. But this proud nation is going to leave the EU. Thank fuck for that and we can all get on with our lives (like #indyref2)
However despite the belief of May and the protestations of Mr Meeks, Brexit was for us about more than just migration. If Brexit is about more than just migration, this is not a fantastic deal.
https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1158366007360139265
It is part of the demilitarisation programme announced by the RUC Chief Constable Sir Ronnie Flanagan in May as part of the Good Friday Agreement.
But by all means tell me that it has nothing to do with the GFA. You think you are being clever, clever but you are actually being a dick.
That's it - that's their stance.
No wonder we ended up no deal.
The next step is probably a squeeze on consumers as imported inflation hits.
The Government seems completely unaware on how to maintain production capacity in the UK to stop the country becoming fully dependent on foreigners. On a quick calculation I estimate that 80% of UK medtech capacity is now controlled outside the UK. Most of this capacity is treating Brexit as a threat and not an opportunity to grow. Unless this changes investment will stay low and the currency will continue to fall.
This fetishisation of "Trade Deals" has been one of the Brexiteers dumber mistakes (among stiff competition).
You’re a fanatic, so you’ll always advocate for it, but just because leaving absolutely everything overnight doesn’t make sense neither does joining absolutely everything either.
It’s pretty obvious that a semi-detached position for the UK has always been the sweet spot.
I’ve accepted no deal as it’ll damage the reputations of the entire Leave movement which is the only comfort I can take.
It’ll be the new we abolished boom and bust.
Take the beam out of your own eye.
I think revoke can only happen after either a GE won by a party explicitly having this in their manifesto or a referendum to this effect - unlikely given the timing. The Cameron deal is no longer on offer.
I am rethinking my position on the euro. Not sure where I will end up. But the point is rather moot in any case.
In the context of the Troubles every seemingly straightforward policing or enforcement action had to have a subsidiary full scale military operation around it. Hence you would get two RUC bobbies walking down the road, thumbs stuck in their tunics, with anything up to 28 soldiers patrolling around them plus helicopters plus other elements just so those two bobbies could walk down the road.
Same with police stations, observations posts, oh fuck it. Forget it. It's not worth the effort. Basically you have to sit on the triangle thing and then reach down with your feet to the pedals oh wait, you don't have feet...
However the backstop is a trap. It wasn't a transition it was nailing down the future and not in a positive way.