Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Day 3 of the Supreme Court hearing opens with the Government’s

SystemSystem Posts: 11,019
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Day 3 of the Supreme Court hearing opens with the Government’s Betfair chances down to lowest level yet

You can watch live here.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,414
    edited December 2016
    IDS has made a right mammary gland of himself over this case.
  • Options
    Mrs May is regretting not calling an Autumn 2016 general election isn't she ?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,981
    FPT:
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    I don't think I've seen this mentioned on PB

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/boom-trump-announces-sprint-agreement-invest-50-billion-us-create-50000-jobs-video/

    "The KC Star reported:

    President-elect Donald Trump said Tuesday that the Tokyo-based parent company of Sprint Corp. has agreed to invest $50 billion and create 50,000 jobs in the United States...."

    He's borrowing $50bn in the US to invest $50bn in the US. It's a sort of "heads he wins, tails the banks lose" kind of trade.
    What is worth $70 Bn in collateral that Sprint is giving ;) ?
    He is using his Sprint holdings as collateral, yes.

    Currently, SoftBank owns 3.3bn shares of sprint, worth around $20bn.

    So, he's using $20bn of collateral to make the trade.

    There's a big but though.

    Sprint itself is very, very highly levered. It has $31bn of debt on its balance sheet, and free cash flow of -$247m. If Sprint works out, he'll do very well. But if US mobile phone prices were to come down towards European levels, then Sprint (the fourth largest US mobile phone company) could find itself in real trouble, real quick.

    I like his chtuzpah: take one asset that's a bit troubled, and borrow $50bn against it, to invest in a whole bunch of other things. If it doesn't work out, walk away from the whole lot, and lose a maximum of $20bn. (And he hasn't really lost that, as he couldn't really sell Sprint for that money today.) But if Sprint works, or if some of these investments pay off, you could be looking at $100bn of upside.

    As I said "heads he wins, tails the banks lose".
  • Options

    IDS has made a right mammary gland of himself over this case.

    IDS clearly explained it is all Tony Blair's fault, so that's all right then.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,070
    edited December 2016

    IDS has made a right mammary gland of himself over this case.

    With IDS it's always about the size of the mammary gland rather than whether he is one or not.
  • Options
    FPT:

    Curiously, Niall Fergusson's recantation over BREXIT has only made the Sun & the Mail - Guardian and BBC must be fact checking it.......

    Did the BBC and Guardian cover Ferguson's original position?
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/25/vote-to-leave-eu-will-condemn-britain-to-irrelevance-say-historians

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36371700
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    I don't think I've seen this mentioned on PB

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/boom-trump-announces-sprint-agreement-invest-50-billion-us-create-50000-jobs-video/

    "The KC Star reported:

    President-elect Donald Trump said Tuesday that the Tokyo-based parent company of Sprint Corp. has agreed to invest $50 billion and create 50,000 jobs in the United States...."

    He's borrowing $50bn in the US to invest $50bn in the US. It's a sort of "heads he wins, tails the banks lose" kind of trade.
    What is worth $70 Bn in collateral that Sprint is giving ;) ?
    He is using his Sprint holdings as collateral, yes.

    Currently, SoftBank owns 3.3bn shares of sprint, worth around $20bn.

    So, he's using $20bn of collateral to make the trade.

    There's a big but though.

    Sprint itself is very, very highly levered. It has $31bn of debt on its balance sheet, and free cash flow of -$247m. If Sprint works out, he'll do very well. But if US mobile phone prices were to come down towards European levels, then Sprint (the fourth largest US mobile phone company) could find itself in real trouble, real quick.

    I like his chtuzpah: take one asset that's a bit troubled, and borrow $50bn against it, to invest in a whole bunch of other things. If it doesn't work out, walk away from the whole lot, and lose a maximum of $20bn. (And he hasn't really lost that, as he couldn't really sell Sprint for that money today.) But if Sprint works, or if some of these investments pay off, you could be looking at $100bn of upside.

    As I said "heads he wins, tails the banks lose".
    Well I assume the bank is earning a healthy amount of interest on this, I'd be looking for around 15% given these "facts"/collateral :)
  • Options

    IDS has made a right mammary gland of himself over this case.

    With IDS it's always about the size of the mammary gland rather than whether he is one or not.
    Very true.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.
  • Options
    FPT:

    Great photo of Osborne looking witheringly at Britain's leading pitchforker, IDS, in DM this morning:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4007894/IAIN-DUNCAN-SMITH-s-crucial-judges-decide-fate-Brexit-scrutinised.html

    Don't bother to read the actual article which just shows why the Tories made their greatest decision when they dumped him. The dog next door has more knowledge of the british legal and constitutional system.

    George has put back on the weight he lost in the run up to his replacement of Cameron the last GE - at first I thought it must be an old photo - but it can't be as he's on the back benches where he belongs (-that's enough - ed.)
  • Options
    F1: Vandoorne's apparently going for #2 as his official driver number.

    Alonso will be pleased ;)
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
  • Options

    FPT:

    Great photo of Osborne looking witheringly at Britain's leading pitchforker, IDS, in DM this morning:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4007894/IAIN-DUNCAN-SMITH-s-crucial-judges-decide-fate-Brexit-scrutinised.html

    Don't bother to read the actual article which just shows why the Tories made their greatest decision when they dumped him. The dog next door has more knowledge of the british legal and constitutional system.

    George has put back on the weight he lost in the run up to his replacement of Cameron the last GE - at first I thought it must be an old photo - but it can't be as he's on the back benches where he belongs (-that's enough - ed.)
    When I saw him a few weeks ago he was svelte as he has been.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, nothing says anarchy like respecting the result of a referendum :p

    I think concerns are more about oligarchy than anarchy. Can't have the pesky unwashed masses getting their way without lawyers sticking their oar in, can we?

    How terribly helpful that the referendum was made advisory rather than binding, a choice that only harms one potential result.

    [I'm being a bit tongue in cheek as I'm procrastinating. But I do think most people will just be annoyed, or angered].
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,582
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    I don't think I've seen this mentioned on PB

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/boom-trump-announces-sprint-agreement-invest-50-billion-us-create-50000-jobs-video/

    "The KC Star reported:

    President-elect Donald Trump said Tuesday that the Tokyo-based parent company of Sprint Corp. has agreed to invest $50 billion and create 50,000 jobs in the United States...."

    He's borrowing $50bn in the US to invest $50bn in the US. It's a sort of "heads he wins, tails the banks lose" kind of trade.
    What is worth $70 Bn in collateral that Sprint is giving ;) ?
    He is using his Sprint holdings as collateral, yes.

    Currently, SoftBank owns 3.3bn shares of sprint, worth around $20bn.

    So, he's using $20bn of collateral to make the trade.

    There's a big but though.

    Sprint itself is very, very highly levered. It has $31bn of debt on its balance sheet, and free cash flow of -$247m. If Sprint works out, he'll do very well. But if US mobile phone prices were to come down towards European levels, then Sprint (the fourth largest US mobile phone company) could find itself in real trouble, real quick.

    I like his chtuzpah: take one asset that's a bit troubled, and borrow $50bn against it, to invest in a whole bunch of other things. If it doesn't work out, walk away from the whole lot, and lose a maximum of $20bn. (And he hasn't really lost that, as he couldn't really sell Sprint for that money today.) But if Sprint works, or if some of these investments pay off, you could be looking at $100bn of upside.

    As I said "heads he wins, tails the banks lose".
    The SoftBank story is pretty amazing. They'd have been more or less wiped out by the tech crash years ago, but for a $20m investment in Alibaba:
    http://www.economist.com/news/business/21678237-masayoshi-son-has-always-bounced-back-setbacks-his-latest-big-moves-are-raising
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    Of course not.

    But the political outcome will be decided by the masses......and as YouGov showed, they believe it's down to the government, not the courts, so I hope the potential victors aren't expecting much thanks for their efforts.....
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,582

    IDS has made a right mammary gland of himself over this case.

    Well he was never going to be the one on the left...
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, nothing says anarchy like respecting the result of a referendum :p

    I think concerns are more about oligarchy than anarchy. Can't have the pesky unwashed masses getting their way without lawyers sticking their oar in, can we?

    How terribly helpful that the referendum was made advisory rather than binding, a choice that only harms one potential result.

    [I'm being a bit tongue in cheek as I'm procrastinating. But I do think most people will just be annoyed, or angered].

    Yeah the 100,000 strong march on the Supreme Court shows the anger and annoyance
  • Options

    FPT:

    Great photo of Osborne looking witheringly at Britain's leading pitchforker, IDS, in DM this morning:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4007894/IAIN-DUNCAN-SMITH-s-crucial-judges-decide-fate-Brexit-scrutinised.html

    Don't bother to read the actual article which just shows why the Tories made their greatest decision when they dumped him. The dog next door has more knowledge of the british legal and constitutional system.

    George has put back on the weight he lost in the run up to his replacement of Cameron the last GE - at first I thought it must be an old photo - but it can't be as he's on the back benches where he belongs (-that's enough - ed.)
    When I saw him a few weeks ago he was svelte as he has been.
    We know you have a man-crush on him.....its a jolly unflattering photo then......
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nominate-someone-for-a-uk-national-honour
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, you're using the absence of a march to claim the presence of mob rule? Interesting approach to logic.
  • Options

    FPT:

    Great photo of Osborne looking witheringly at Britain's leading pitchforker, IDS, in DM this morning:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4007894/IAIN-DUNCAN-SMITH-s-crucial-judges-decide-fate-Brexit-scrutinised.html

    Don't bother to read the actual article which just shows why the Tories made their greatest decision when they dumped him. The dog next door has more knowledge of the british legal and constitutional system.

    George has put back on the weight he lost in the run up to his replacement of Cameron the last GE - at first I thought it must be an old photo - but it can't be as he's on the back benches where he belongs (-that's enough - ed.)
    When I saw him a few weeks ago he was svelte as he has been.
    We know you have a man-crush on him.....its a jolly unflattering photo then......
    I only have man crushes on Johnny Mercer, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Tom Hiddleston
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nominate-someone-for-a-uk-national-honour
    On reflection perhaps a 38 Degrees petition would be easier!
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, you're using the absence of a march to claim the presence of mob rule? Interesting approach to logic.

    No you silly billy.

    The lack of the mass march was a reference to your comment of 'But I do think most people will just be annoyed, or angered'
  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, nothing says anarchy like respecting the result of a referendum :p

    I think concerns are more about oligarchy than anarchy. Can't have the pesky unwashed masses getting their way without lawyers sticking their oar in, can we?

    How terribly helpful that the referendum was made advisory rather than binding, a choice that only harms one potential result.

    [I'm being a bit tongue in cheek as I'm procrastinating. But I do think most people will just be annoyed, or angered].

    Yeah the 100,000 strong march on the Supreme Court shows the anger and annoyance
    It's 'cos us leavers are used to abiding by the rules, you remainers are the ones who like to march and wave yer beloved EU flag.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Jon Ashmore
    No Labour MPs on PMQs list. Party source: "It's a sign of their strong support and respect for Emily Thornberry" (Corbyn's stand-in)
  • Options
    JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    Scott_P said:
    Looks like that devaluation is working well then.
  • Options
    Talking of the masses and political consequences

    @GoodwinMJ A useful stat to keep in the mind today - 401 of 632 constituencies voted to leave the EU, or 63%. Data via @chrishanretty

  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Who knows what will happen, change is surely on the cards regardless

    https://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/the-new-white-house-press-order/
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,981
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    I don't think I've seen this mentioned on PB

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/boom-trump-announces-sprint-agreement-invest-50-billion-us-create-50000-jobs-video/

    "The KC Star reported:

    President-elect Donald Trump said Tuesday that the Tokyo-based parent company of Sprint Corp. has agreed to invest $50 billion and create 50,000 jobs in the United States...."

    He's borrowing $50bn in the US to invest $50bn in the US. It's a sort of "heads he wins, tails the banks lose" kind of trade.
    What is worth $70 Bn in collateral that Sprint is giving ;) ?
    He is using his Sprint holdings as collateral, yes.

    Currently, SoftBank owns 3.3bn shares of sprint, worth around $20bn.

    So, he's using $20bn of collateral to make the trade.

    There's a big but though.

    Sprint itself is very, very highly levered. It has $31bn of debt on its balance sheet, and free cash flow of -$247m. If Sprint works out, he'll do very well. But if US mobile phone prices were to come down towards European levels, then Sprint (the fourth largest US mobile phone company) could find itself in real trouble, real quick.

    I like his chtuzpah: take one asset that's a bit troubled, and borrow $50bn against it, to invest in a whole bunch of other things. If it doesn't work out, walk away from the whole lot, and lose a maximum of $20bn. (And he hasn't really lost that, as he couldn't really sell Sprint for that money today.) But if Sprint works, or if some of these investments pay off, you could be looking at $100bn of upside.

    As I said "heads he wins, tails the banks lose".
    Well I assume the bank is earning a healthy amount of interest on this, I'd be looking for around 15% given these "facts"/collateral :)
    Well, it'll work like this.

    The first $1bn he borrows will be very cheap (say 2%) - because there is 20x the collateral behind it. Sprint would actually have to go bust, and the investments be worthless, for the bank not to get their money back.

    The next $10bn will be reasonably cheap (5-7%), because the coverage of assets will be c 3x ($20bn Sprint + $10bn investments).

    The next $20bn would be at mezzanine debt pricing. (Say 10-15%)

    And the remaining $19bn would only ever get called if the first $31bn of investments were doing really well.
  • Options
    ICYMI

    Liz Truss and her tribute to The Day Today

    https://twitter.com/Sean__Clare/status/806132017242972161
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    Jon Ashmore
    No Labour MPs on PMQs list. Party source: "It's a sign of their strong support and respect for Emily Thornberry" (Corbyn's stand-in)

    No laughing at the back...
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited December 2016
    I've posted on this before, an interesting read from another source

    "Here is the classic case, the Second Amendment Incident. The thing to be aware of is that his words are carefully chosen. They go by quickly when people hear them. But they are processed unconsciously first by neural circuitry — and neurons operate on a thousandth-of-a-second time scale. Your neural circuitry has plenty of time to engage in complex forms of understanding, based on what you already know.

    Trump begins by saying, “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment.” He first just says “abolish,” and then hedges by adding “essentially abolish.” But having said “abolish” twice, he has gotten across the message that she wants to, and is able to, change the Constitution in that way."

    https://georgelakoff.com/2016/08/19/understanding-trumps-use-of-language/
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, annoyance and anger can be shown in more productive ways than marching. Voting, for example.
  • Options
    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,981

    ICYMI

    Liz Truss and her tribute to The Day Today

    https://twitter.com/Sean__Clare/status/806132017242972161

    hahahhahahahah
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    Jon Ashmore
    No Labour MPs on PMQs list. Party source: "It's a sign of their strong support and respect for Emily Thornberry" (Corbyn's stand-in)

    errrrrrrr
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,816
    It's looking like Gina Miller and co may have saved Brexit after all, then.

    After all, compare the following outcomes:

    THE WAY THINGS ARE:
    - The case is taken to Court before Government tries to invoke A50. The High Court checks constitutional law and affirms that the constitutional requirements for the UK are that Parliament makes the official decision to withdraw. The Supreme Court either uphold or reject this. If they reject it, no delay, no issue. If they uphold it, TMay has three-and-a-half months to get a short Bill through Parliament whilst holding an absolute majority in the Commons and the moral backing of a referendum. It either passes easily or MPs block it; if they block it, she has plenty of routes to dissolving Parliament (even with the FTPA) in plenty of time to let the people kick out the blockers. No delay.

    IN A WORLD WHERE THE REMAINERS PLAY CUNNING:
    - They wait for after March, and maybe into next year. Or even 18 months into negotiations and then bring the case.
    The law is the same, and the outcome is revealed similarly. It is found that this Member State has not followed the first provision of Article 50: "1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
    A case is brought to the ECJ to block Brexit on account of Article 50 not having been lawfully invoked. The exit process is halted while the court finds - and given the law, it looks pretty clear.
    We're now deep into 2019 or even 2020. Article 50 has not been officially invoked and everything is a clusterfuck. Given the fallout and chaos, the chance of actually halting Brexit completely would be orders of magnitude greater.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2016

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Ed Conway making a tit of himself...nothing new there.
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113

    Mr. Eagles, annoyance and anger can be shown in more productive ways than marching. Voting, for example.

    Indeed, as was demonstrated in Richmond.
  • Options
    JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Industrial Output is always noisy; manufacturing output down 0.9% is a more worrying sign of the lack of devaluation boost.
  • Options
    Wonderful spat between Phil Collins and Aaron Banks on twitter at moment: @PCollinsTimes
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    I find #fakenews the most ridiculous meme of recent times. I hope it dies a prompt death as every side does it. Fake campus rapes at Rolling Stone or Rathergate or whatever.

    This is a great example of partial stat reporting by partisans.

    http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-buried-trump-related-hate-crimes-against-white-kids/
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    This is shaping up to be the perfect outcome for everyone - the metro remainers get to squeal with delight at lawyers and judges puffing themselves up and an anti-IDS twitter fwap as dessert.

    Meanwhile the Labour party votes through the PM's amendment to invoke art 50 by end of March....

  • Options
    Noooo!

    Britain should hold “super Thursday” votes once every four years to elect every councillor in the country, a Conservative MP has declared.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/81501/tory-mp-calls-annual-super-thursday-elect
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Ed Conway making a tit of himself...nothing new there.
    Do we know if the major oilfield was travelling in first class on the train ? Ed ? Ed ??
  • Options
    I see Scottish football fans have disgraced themselves again in Manchester

    One Celtic fan was also arrested for throwing a hamburger at a police horse.
  • Options

    I see Scottish football fans have disgraced themselves again in Manchester

    One Celtic fan was also arrested for throwing a hamburger at a police horse.

    Encouraging equine cannibalism, disgraceful.
  • Options
    Mr. Divvie, if the police horse was a vegan, it could be a hate crime.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    I see Scottish football fans have disgraced themselves again in Manchester

    One Celtic fan was also arrested for throwing a hamburger at a police horse.

    Not the biggest or vilest Celtic story making the papers today

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4008404/There-t-remember-Paedophile-former-Celtic-coach-71-admits-waging-20-year-campaign-sexual-abuse-against-young-players-cleanse-soul.html
  • Options

    ICYMI

    Liz Truss and her tribute to The Day Today

    https://twitter.com/Sean__Clare/status/806132017242972161

    That. Is. A. Disgrace.
  • Options
    These odds make no sense. While "Do Not Overrule" should be favourite, "Overrule" should be no longer than 6/4.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Ed Conway making a tit of himself...nothing new there.
    I paid him a very nice compliment on the Times website, he cut and pasted it, and tweeted it to ridicule my praise of an informative article.

    Beyond stupid. Talk about denigrating your audience. He's one of the reasons I stopped my subscription.
  • Options
    Miss Plato, that sounds really rather stupid. Why would someone mock the person who made a positive comment on an article they wrote?

    Not to mention it being rude.
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    I find #fakenews the most ridiculous meme of recent times. I hope it dies a prompt death as every side does it. Fake campus rapes at Rolling Stone or Rathergate or whatever.

    This is a great example of partial stat reporting by partisans.

    http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-buried-trump-related-hate-crimes-against-white-kids/

    Talking of fake news:

    Note to Breitbart: Earth Is Not Cooling, Climate Change Is Real and Please Stop Using Our Video to Mislead Americans
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    @Tissue_Price

    An English hymn commonly associated with harvest festival. The hymn was originally German, by poet Matthias Claudius, "Wir pflügen und wir streuen" published in 1782, and set to music in 1800, and attributed to Johann A. P. Schulz.

    It was translated into English by Jane Montgomery Campbell in 1861. It appears in a shortened form in the musical Godspell, as the song, "All Good Gifts".

    It is amongst the most performed of hymns in the United Kingdom.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,710

    It's looking like Gina Miller and co may have saved Brexit after all, then.

    After all, compare the following outcomes:

    THE WAY THINGS ARE:
    - The case is taken to Court before Government tries to invoke A50. The High Court checks constitutional law and affirms that the constitutional requirements for the UK are that Parliament makes the official decision to withdraw. The Supreme Court either uphold or reject this. If they reject it, no delay, no issue. If they uphold it, TMay has three-and-a-half months to get a short Bill through Parliament whilst holding an absolute majority in the Commons and the moral backing of a referendum. It either passes easily or MPs block it; if they block it, she has plenty of routes to dissolving Parliament (even with the FTPA) in plenty of time to let the people kick out the blockers. No delay.

    IN A WORLD WHERE THE REMAINERS PLAY CUNNING:
    - They wait for after March, and maybe into next year. Or even 18 months into negotiations and then bring the case.
    The law is the same, and the outcome is revealed similarly. It is found that this Member State has not followed the first provision of Article 50: "1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
    A case is brought to the ECJ to block Brexit on account of Article 50 not having been lawfully invoked. The exit process is halted while the court finds - and given the law, it looks pretty clear.
    We're now deep into 2019 or even 2020. Article 50 has not been officially invoked and everything is a clusterfuck. Given the fallout and chaos, the chance of actually halting Brexit completely would be orders of magnitude greater.

    The battle is over the HOW and not the WHAT of Brexit. There is essentially no legal way to stop Brexit. (And FWIW, and as someone who is confident Brexit is going to be a huge mess anyway, I don't think they should try). Even your second approach would only delay it until the government got its ducks in a row. Theresa May wants to shut down debate over the HOW. The legal challenge is one way of pushing back.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited December 2016

    Miss Plato, that sounds really rather stupid. Why would someone mock the person who made a positive comment on an article they wrote?

    Not to mention it being rude.

    I was WTF. I simply said I wished to see more great columns, he mocked me for not knowing he'd a regular one. I'd not noticed yet knew and looked for other columnists.

    Totally weird and rude clever dickhead behaviour by him. I've unfollowed so many journalists on Twitter recently, I look at their childish playground output and see nothing worth reading. It's embarrassing stuff.

    The whole profession is obsessed with trivia, gossip and innuendo. There's no news.

    Guido has more scoops and doesn't pretend to be high faluting.
  • Options
    Miss Plato, that's dickish indeed.

    It'd be like someone asking me if my books were on Kobo (Kingdom Asunder is) and mocking them for not searching instead of pointing them to a link.

    In Zhuge Liang's writings, he said (speaking of Arrogance in Generals) - Generals should not be arrogant, for if they are arrogant they become discourteous, and if they are discourteous people will be alienated from them. When people are alienated, they become rebellious.

    [Also fits the Cameronian Little Englander campaign rather nicely].

    Mr. Perdix, sounds to me like there should be nominations for the 2017 Space Cannon list.
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    perdix said:

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

    On what grounds?
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,816
    edited December 2016
    FF43 said:

    It's looking like Gina Miller and co may have saved Brexit after all, then.

    After all, compare the following outcomes:

    THE WAY THINGS ARE:
    - The case is taken to Court before Government tries to invoke A50. The High Court checks constitutional law and affirms that the constitutional requirements for the UK are that Parliament makes the official decision to withdraw. The Supreme Court either uphold or reject this. If they reject it, no delay, no issue. If they uphold it, TMay has three-and-a-half months to get a short Bill through Parliament whilst holding an absolute majority in the Commons and the moral backing of a referendum. It either passes easily or MPs block it; if they block it, she has plenty of routes to dissolving Parliament (even with the FTPA) in plenty of time to let the people kick out the blockers. No delay.

    IN A WORLD WHERE THE REMAINERS PLAY CUNNING:
    - They wait for after March, and maybe into next year. Or even 18 months into negotiations and then bring the case.
    The law is the same, and the outcome is revealed similarly. It is found that this Member State has not followed the first provision of Article 50: "1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."
    A case is brought to the ECJ to block Brexit on account of Article 50 not having been lawfully invoked. The exit process is halted while the court finds - and given the law, it looks pretty clear.
    We're now deep into 2019 or even 2020. Article 50 has not been officially invoked and everything is a clusterfuck. Given the fallout and chaos, the chance of actually halting Brexit completely would be orders of magnitude greater.

    The battle is over the HOW and not the WHAT of Brexit. There is essentially no legal way to stop Brexit. (And FWIW, and as someone who is confident Brexit is going to be a huge mess anyway, I don't think they should try). Even your second approach would only delay it until the government got its ducks in a row. Theresa May wants to shut down debate over the HOW. The legal challenge is one way of pushing back.
    The point is that doing it this way doesn't delay or risk Brexit; doing it the other way delays (by up to years) and causes utter chaos around Brexit.

    I do not get the anger Leavers have over it. Total delay incurred = 0 months, 0 weeks, 0 days, 0 hours.

    EDIT: Oh, and given that one way around the chaos if the second route were to be followed would be for the ECJ to decree that A50 was revocable (and thus salvage the constitutional legitimacy)... do Leaver's really want to hand a reverse gear to the Remainers?
  • Options
    Red cards in cricket ? World's gone mad

    MCC recommends red cards be introduced into laws of cricket

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/dec/07/mcc-recommend-red-cards-sending-off-laws-of-cricket
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,710

    These odds make no sense. While "Do Not Overrule" should be favourite, "Overrule" should be no longer than 6/4.

    Journalists have favourably compared the cogent advocacy of the Article 50 challenge with the mundane case put by the Government side. But that seems to be partly down to a more personable advocate for the challenge. It's not likely to cut much ice with Supreme Court judges, who will have a higher regard for their own understanding of the law than any barrister that comes before them.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @faisalislam: As I was saying: Lord Hughes specifically asks Pannick what type of legislation will be required to trigger Article 50?

    @faisalislam: ... this followed Pannick arguing that elements of the COmmunications Act and thousands of other statute "make no sense" after we leave EU
  • Options

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Ed Conway making a tit of himself...nothing new there.
    All part of Sky (EU) broadcasting
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,546

    Noooo!

    Britain should hold “super Thursday” votes once every four years to elect every councillor in the country, a Conservative MP has declared.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/81501/tory-mp-calls-annual-super-thursday-elect

    My experience is that councils manage transitions better than parliament does.
    So I would do it the other way round - elect parliament in thirds. That way you'd actually have a Government that governed properly rather than doing all the difficult stuff the year after the election and turning into Santa the year before, and would be far more responsive to changes in mood.
    You'd also have better campaigning, as activists would only have to fight 1/3 of seats at once, so would be able to work properly in a greater spread of seats than they can at the moment.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Red cards in cricket ? World's gone mad

    MCC recommends red cards be introduced into laws of cricket

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/dec/07/mcc-recommend-red-cards-sending-off-laws-of-cricket

    Much more interesting: "The committee believes that the balance of the game has tilted too far in the batsman’s favour and has also recommended specific bat size limitations."
  • Options
    FF43 said:

    These odds make no sense. While "Do Not Overrule" should be favourite, "Overrule" should be no longer than 6/4.

    Journalists have favourably compared the cogent advocacy of the Article 50 challenge with the mundane case put by the Government side. But that seems to be partly down to a more personable advocate for the challenge. It's not likely to cut much ice with Supreme Court judges, who will have a higher regard for their own understanding of the law than any barrister that comes before them.
    On this occasion, journalists don't know what they're talking about. Good luck trying to overwhelm Lord Sumption with skilful advocacy.

    Yesterday Faisal Islam observed on twitter that: "The Justices interventions with Pannick have, so far, been far more confirmatory "Does this mean xyz? Yes" than with Eadie."

    That is not good for the respondents. Engaged judges challenge and pull at arguments. They don't just seek to establish what the arguments are.
  • Options
    perdix said:

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

    You can't deport British citizens.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    Red cards in cricket ? World's gone mad

    MCC recommends red cards be introduced into laws of cricket

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/dec/07/mcc-recommend-red-cards-sending-off-laws-of-cricket

    Much more interesting: "The committee believes that the balance of the game has tilted too far in the batsman’s favour and has also recommended specific bat size limitations."
    Yup. Sky did comparisons between the bats Botham used at Headingley 81 and Gooch used for his triple hundred with the bats used today.

    Ian Ward and Mike Atherton reckoned in modern times Botham would have score 300 instead of 149 and Gooch 500
  • Options

    perdix said:

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

    On what grounds?
    She looks foreign.
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    Miss Plato, that sounds really rather stupid. Why would someone mock the person who made a positive comment on an article they wrote?

    Not to mention it being rude.

    I was WTF. I simply said I wished to see more great columns, he mocked me for not knowing he'd a regular one. I'd not noticed yet knew and looked for other columnists.

    Totally weird and rude clever dickhead behaviour by him. I've unfollowed so many journalists on Twitter recently, I look at their childish playground output and see nothing worth reading. It's embarrassing stuff.

    The whole profession is obsessed with trivia, gossip and innuendo. There's no news.

    Guido has more scoops and doesn't pretend to be high faluting.

    Is Guido low faluting?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    perdix said:

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

    You can't deport British citizens.
    We used to! Bring back penal colonies I say.
  • Options
    Lord Sumption and I have the same tie.
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    Red cards in cricket ? World's gone mad

    MCC recommends red cards be introduced into laws of cricket

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/dec/07/mcc-recommend-red-cards-sending-off-laws-of-cricket

    Much more interesting: "The committee believes that the balance of the game has tilted too far in the batsman’s favour and has also recommended specific bat size limitations."
    Yup. Sky did comparisons between the bats Botham used at Headingley 81 and Gooch used for his triple hundred with the bats used today.

    Ian Ward and Mike Atherton reckoned in modern times Botham would have score 300 instead of 149 and Gooch 500
    Yet draws are happening less at the moment I think?
  • Options
    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.

    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.

    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.

    Remainers are playing with fire.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    @afneil UK industrial output suffered its biggest monthly drop in more than four years in October after the temporary shutdown of a major oilfield

    Before anyone get carried away.....Look! See! I told you!

    Ed Conway making a tit of himself...nothing new there.
    All part of Sky (EU) broadcasting
    I'd SkyNews as my default channel for a couple of years - and always watched Eamonn every morning. Now I default to FreeSat 159 to Yesterday in protest. I'm losing nothing by ignoring SkyNews and the rest of them.

    I get better faster news using Twitter and defaulting to the USA trending topics 9/10 days.
  • Options
    Mr. NorthWales, it *may* prove a Pyrrhic victory.

    Mr. P, I'm sure lawyers and judges meddling in Parliament's business [by discussing what legislation may be needed] will go down swimmingly with the country.

    The Sky News saturation coverage remains bloody tedious.
  • Options

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.

    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.

    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.

    Remainers are playing with fire.

    "subvert the will of the people" You missed the word 'half'.
  • Options
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    FF43 said:

    These odds make no sense. While "Do Not Overrule" should be favourite, "Overrule" should be no longer than 6/4.

    Journalists have favourably compared the cogent advocacy of the Article 50 challenge with the mundane case put by the Government side. But that seems to be partly down to a more personable advocate for the challenge. It's not likely to cut much ice with Supreme Court judges, who will have a higher regard for their own understanding of the law than any barrister that comes before them.
    On this occasion, journalists don't know what they're talking about. Good luck trying to overwhelm Lord Sumption with skilful advocacy.

    Yesterday Faisal Islam observed on twitter that: "The Justices interventions with Pannick have, so far, been far more confirmatory "Does this mean xyz? Yes" than with Eadie."

    That is not good for the respondents. Engaged judges challenge and pull at arguments. They don't just seek to establish what the arguments are.
    The mismatch between "must have a conclusion for the news" and the reality of court process is rarely so stark. It might be helpful if experts were doing the reporting.
  • Options
    Mr. Song, more than half* ;)
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.

    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.

    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.

    Remainers are playing with fire.

    I quite agree - if it's seen as a Remainer win, the nuance of legal process blah is lost a la Let Them Eat Cake.
  • Options

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.
    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.
    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.
    Remainers are playing with fire.

    Very true. There is a backlash coming.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.

    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.

    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.

    Remainers are playing with fire.

    All it needed was a one line bill in Sept to authorise A50 at a time of the PMs choosing, as the distinguished lawyers on here advocated.

    May will now have to do that unwillingly and will be weakened as a result.

    Its a shame.
  • Options
    Man arrested over threats made online against Gina Miller, the woman behind Brexit legal challenge
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,546

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.

    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.

    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.

    Remainers are playing with fire.

    I'd agree with much of that, from the other side of the fence. Pro-europeans can do a lot of damage with how they react to this. However from where I'm standing, the real issue is that I don't trust Theresa May an inch. She's claiming the referendum result means a lot of things just because she says so, and trying to get around any scrutiny of what she's up to. Opposing PMs is nothing new for me - but I've never had one whose values were so alien to me. So I'm hoping the courts will give her a smack on the fingers and force her to actually act in the interests of the country not just what she wants. And start to heal the divisions from the referendum she's shown no will or ability to so far. So for me, the initial judgement was very much in line with supporting the will of the people, rather than the Daily Mail's perspective.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,057

    My instincts tell me that the Supreme Court and remainers may win but will lose the war in the eyes of the voter.
    I believe that this will lead to increasing anger with the out of touch left elite and those threatening to stop Brexit.
    I expect to see many remainers siding with leavers as an injustice is perceived to be happening. You can throw as much common law as you like at trying to subvert the will of the people but it will only increase the reasons why Brexit happened, as well as Trump and this week Italy.
    Remainers are playing with fire.

    Very true. There is a backlash coming.
    It will be targeted at the three Brexiteers for making a hash of the whole thing.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,710

    FF43 said:

    These odds make no sense. While "Do Not Overrule" should be favourite, "Overrule" should be no longer than 6/4.

    Journalists have favourably compared the cogent advocacy of the Article 50 challenge with the mundane case put by the Government side. But that seems to be partly down to a more personable advocate for the challenge. It's not likely to cut much ice with Supreme Court judges, who will have a higher regard for their own understanding of the law than any barrister that comes before them.
    On this occasion, journalists don't know what they're talking about. Good luck trying to overwhelm Lord Sumption with skilful advocacy.

    Yesterday Faisal Islam observed on twitter that: "The Justices interventions with Pannick have, so far, been far more confirmatory "Does this mean xyz? Yes" than with Eadie."

    That is not good for the respondents. Engaged judges challenge and pull at arguments. They don't just seek to establish what the arguments are.
    To what extent is that a reflection of this being an appeal and the Supreme Court deciding whether to overturn the High Court decision? In other words, the government has to make the case that the High Court got it wrong and the Supreme Court judges are testing those arguments, while the arguments for the Article 50 challenge remain the same as before and are less examined.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,808
    I'm only skim following the Supreme Court, so correct me if my impression of it is wrong, but is the drift towards Do Not Overrule based on the arguments having deviated or expanded rather little from the High Court case, even where there might have been scope to do so?
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,415

    perdix said:

    Mr. Eagles, got to say I think any finding against the Government will annoy far more people than it delights.

    My mother voted for Remain, but is bloody sick of the dilly-dallying.

    Justice shouldn't be decided to please the masses.

    It must be based on the rule of law.

    Otherwise we're headed for anarchy.
    If it forces May to take a more open and collaborative approach to the monumental task the nation faces, it will all have been worth it.

    Where do I nominate Gina Miller for a gong?
    Gina Miller should be nominated for deportation.

    You can't deport British citizens.
    We used to! Bring back penal colonies I say.
    I've said it before. There are no downsides.
This discussion has been closed.