Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
Where is the 'yes, but I'd be happier outside' option?
Dunno. Perhaps they looked at Brexiteer Brits and assumed that their easygoing, placid contentment applies in every political outcome, so a differentiated question wasn't required.
Good snippet in the Irish press from Matt's review: Conservative minister warning Irish politicians that if they push it the pressure on Mrs May to walk away will be huge.
The EU have forgotten that we don't have a history of succumbing to pressure from a foreign power.
Lol, walking away is not an option and everyone (including the EU) knows it
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
If the outcome is a hard border in Ireland then a vote for a United Ireland would be a vote for a hard border with the U.K. Might also want to consider the economic effect for The North of moving the political power from Belfast to Dublin. Would surely suck business and jobs southwards
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
I hope that Ireland also remembers that 5000 who left the Irish armed forces to fight Nazism in WW2 were subjected to Courts Martial for desertion by Ireland, and then blacklisted from employment by the Irish Government, and refused their military pensions. That was nastily vindictive. It cuts both ways.
For me, Varadkar's stance seems bizarre. In order to get things he already has commitments to, he is threatening to wreck the process and make sure something he doesn't want is what actually happens.
Varadkar is hoping that Brussels will bung Ireland some more money.
Why do you suspect that?
If there is one thing that we learn from Brexit, it is that tubthumping, nationalistic flagwaving beats anodyne economic issues.
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
If the Irish veto progress to trade talks then that is them putting a hard border in place as it is them ensuring we have a hard Brexit. The Democratic Unionist voters won't blame London for Dublin's actions.
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
The solution to both this and the rest of the seemingly intractable problems with Brexit is simple and all-but-trivial: we move to the EEA, at least initially. It was designed as a half-way house between being outside the EU and being inside it, it's straightforward, and it's proven.
A majority of seats across the UK were won by the ngle market.
You're clutching at straws! The "in or out of the EEA" discussion hardly featured in the GE. Compared with Andy's argument, your point is uncharacteristically weak.
Surely you can come up with a better argument than that?
It hardly featured because Corbyn backed leaving the EEA too!
So voters weren't voting on that issue but on other issues. The fact they voted Tory or Labour doesn't mean they favoured leaving the EEA or even the EU. Most Labour voters are Remainers. Your argument just doesn't stack up and Andy's does.
No EEA.
Speak for yourself! I for one didn't vote Conservative or Labour to leave the single market. Your statements today have a higher 'sweeping coefficient' than usual!
voted LD
No I shouldn't!
Brexit was not the only issue, for me at least.
If Brexit was not the key issue for you and you were willing to put aside the manifesto commitment of the party you voted for to leave the single market because you thought other issues more important, don't then complain when that manifesto commitment to leave the single market is then delivered.
But DO complain if someone then claims that YOU wanted to leave the single market because you voted for a party with that in its manifesto!
No, party manifestos are there for a reason, I would never vote for a party if I fundamentally disagreed with a key term of its manifesto as that is what the party intends to deliver in government. If I disagreed with that term that strongly I would vote for another party that did take a position on the issue in its manifesto I agreed with.
You are unusual. Most voters never read a manifesto nor know what is in it. Manifestos are used by politicians after the event. "But it was in our manifesto!"
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
The DUP is a Unionist party backing the Conservative and Unionist Party, that is rather different from a Liberal Party backing a Conservative Party as was the case in 2010.
The DUP won most votes and seats in NI on a platform of backing the May government's position on Brexit.
Discussion is as lively as ever and no doubt will continue to be so for quite some time to come.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
The solution to both this and the rest of the seemingly intractable problems with Brexit is simple and all-but-trivial: we move to the EEA, at least initially. It was designed as a half-way house between being outside the EU and being inside it, it's straightforward, and it's proven.
A majority of seats across the UK were won by the ngle market.
You're clutching at straws! The "in or out of the EEA" discussion hardly featured in the GE. Compared with Andy's argument, your point is uncharacteristically weak.
Surely you can come up with a better argument than that?
It hardly featured because Corbyn backed leaving the EEA too!
So voters weren't voting on that issue but on other issues. The fact they voted Tory or Labour doesn't mean they favoured leaving the EEA or even the EU. Most Labour voters are Remainers. Your argument just doesn't stack up and Andy's does.
No EEA.
Speak for yourself! I for one didn't vote Conservative or Labour to leave the single market. Your statements today have a higher 'sweeping coefficient' than usual!
voted LD
No I shouldn't!
Brexit was not the only issue, for me at least.
If Brexit was not the key issue for you and you were willing to put aside the manifesto commitment of the party you voted for to leave the single market because you thought other issues more important, don't then complain when that manifesto commitment to leave the single market is then delivered.
But DO complain if someone then claims that YOU wanted to leave the single market because you voted for a party with that in its manifesto!
No, party manifestos are manifesto I agreed with.
You are unusual. Most voters never read a manifesto nor know what is in it. Manifestos are used by politicians after the event. "But it was in our manifesto!"
As politicians are entitled to do, if you sign a contract you read the small print first, same as when you vote for a party you read the small print of their manifesto first if you are vociferously concerned by one issue to check that party shares your position on it.
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
You did say majority of SEATS., but find it convenient to switch between seats and votes.
We could have imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 like most EU nations, it was Blair's failure to do so which was a key reason for the Leave vote.
What's the evidence for that? There's no particular correlation between areas of high immigration and a high Leave vote (if anything it's the opposite) and only a minimal correlation between there being a lot of immigration and the voters thinking there's too much immigration. Leave mainly ran on hypothetical brown people from Turkey and/or Syria rather than actual Europeans.
The evidence is that there was only a turnout of more than 70% because working class voters turned out to vote Leave to reduce immigration.
It was of course Merkel's decision to open the EU doors to migrants from Syria which meant Syrian migration was also interconnected to EU/EEA free movement.
We know the voters oppose immigration, and particularly immigration by brown people. What I'm not seeing is where you get the idea that they oppose it because of transitional arrangements with EU accession countries. If there was at least a connection in the data between immigration actually happening and voters opposing immigration then we could at least speculate that it might have been the EU accession immigration that made the difference (since there was lots of it) but the data shows the opposite.
I don't think its a coincidence that the district which has the highest proportion of Eastern European immigrants also had the highest Leave vote.
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
What is the DUP position on UK remaining in the customs union? I know they are supporting the Government line on that but is it enthusiastically or reluctantly? It could be a breaking point.
We could have imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 like most EU nations, it was Blair's failure to do so which was a key reason for the Leave vote.
What's the evidence for that? There's no particular correlation between areas of high immigration and a high Leave vote (if anything it's the opposite) and only a minimal correlation between there being a lot of immigration and the voters thinking there's too much immigration. Leave mainly ran on hypothetical brown people from Turkey and/or Syria rather than actual Europeans.
The evidence is that there was only a turnout of more than 70% because working class voters turned out to vote Leave to reduce immigration.
It was of course Merkel's decision to open the EU doors to migrants from Syria which meant Syrian migration was also interconnected to EU/EEA free movement.
We know the voters oppose immigration, and particularly immigration by brown people. What I'm not seeing is where you get the idea that they oppose it because of transitional arrangements with EU accession countries. If there was at least a connection in the data between immigration actually happening and voters opposing immigration then we could at least speculate that it might have been the EU accession immigration that made the difference (since there was lots of it) but the data shows the opposite.
I don't think its a coincidence that the district which has the highest proportion of Eastern European immigrants also had the highest Leave vote.
The solution to both this and the rest of the seemingly intractable problems with Brexit is simple and all-but-trivial: we move to the EEA, at least initially. It was designed as a half-way house between being outside the EU and being inside it, it's straightforward, and it's proven.
A majority of seats across the UK were won by the ngle market.
You're clutching at straws! The "in or out of the EEA" discussion hardly featured in the GE. Compared with Andy's argument, your point is uncharacteristically weak.
Surely you can come up with a better argument than that?
It hardly featured because Corbyn backed leaving the EEA too!
So voters weren't voting on that issue but on other issues. The fact they voted Tory or Labour doesn't mean they favoured leaving the EEA or even the EU. Most Labour voters are Remainers. Your argument just doesn't stack up and Andy's does.
No EEA.
Speak for yourself! I for one didn't vote Conservative or Labour to leave the single market. Your statements today have a higher 'sweeping coefficient' than usual!
voted LD
No I shouldn't!
Brexit was not the only issue, for me at least.
If Brexit was not the key issue for you and you were willing to put aside the manifesto commitment of the party you voted for to leave the single market because you thought other issues more important, don't then complain when that manifesto commitment to leave the single market is then delivered.
But DO complain if someone then claims that YOU wanted to leave the single market because you voted for a party with that in its manifesto!
No, party manifestos are manifesto I agreed with.
You are unusual. Most voters never read a manifesto nor know what is in it. Manifestos are used by politicians after the event. "But it was in our manifesto!"
As politicians are entitled to do, if you sign a contract you read the small print first, same as when you vote for a party you read the small print of their manifesto first if you are vociferously concerned by one issue to check that party shares your position on it.
You must be a politician (or a double glazing salesman). "Didn't you read the small print".
Discussion is as lively as ever and no doubt will continue to be so for quite some time to come.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
I hope that Ireland also remembers that 5000 who left the Irish armed forces to fight Nazism in WW2 were subjected to Courts Martial for desertion by Ireland, and then blacklisted from employment by the Irish Government, and refused their military pensions. That was nastily vindictive. It cuts both ways.
For me, Varadkar's stance seems bizarre. In order to get things he already has commitments to, he is threatening to wreck the process and make sure something he doesn't want is what actually happens.
Varadkar is hoping that Brussels will bung Ireland some more money.
Why do you suspect that?
If there is one thing that we learn from Brexit, it is that tubthumping, nationalistic flagwaving beats anodyne economic issues.
Ireland has been getting payoffs throughout its EU membership.
Casablanca a great parable for Brexit. I wonder how Rick 'citizen of the world' would have got on with our 'little Enganders'
In that the good guys escape with enormous difficulty from the clutches of a malign European Franco-German alliance by fleeing to their true friends in America and Africa, respectively. A parable indeed.
Casablanca a great parable for Brexit. I wonder how Rick 'citizen of the world' would have got on with our 'little Enganders'
In that the good guys escape with enormous difficulty from the clutches of a malign European Franco-German alliance by fleeing to their true friends in America and Africa, respectively. A parable indeed.
LOL. Exactly. I do love it when Roger tries to be clever and gets shot down.
Silly question. I'm happy living in the EU but voted to Leave the EU. I'm happy with my nation and it is currently part of the EU.
You're happy living in the EU?
Ok.
Yes. I'd rather live here than in Africa for instance. The question means different things depending upon how you interpret it.
Brexiteer has painful accident as he transfers his dancing from the head to the point of a pin.
If you asked Scots "are you happy living in the UK" then I'd expect similar results. The question doesn't ask what you and the EU imply it does.
I'm not implying it means anything, hence my use of the word baffling.
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Discussion is as lively as ever and no doubt will continue to be so for quite some time to come.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
All the best Big G! Look forward to your return
Thank you RoyalBlue - need to get back soon as I hope to do my 10,000 post before Nick (Palmer)
You must be a politician (or a double glazing salesman). "Didn't you read the small print".
I'm enjoying the cognitive dissonance: - When there is a specific vote on a single issue, democracy means going into the potential motivations of various groups of voters and arguing what they meant. - When there is a general vote on a manifesto with hundreds of issues inside (under a system where it's not even questioned that voting has dozens of even non-manifesto issues, such as tribalism, exclusion of the leading other choice and so on, as shown by polling), democracy means taking that vote as completely supportive of whatever single element in there the arguer decides to select.
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
If you review your earlier post, you will see that you said "seats", not "votes".
Your conversion to the cause of fair votes is nevertheless welcome.
Dawn Butler, who says Theresa May “might be female but she is no friend of women”, and that the Tories have done nothing for women.
If you want to look at what is wrong with our political system, dawn butler is a great example. Thick as shit, expense fiddler, and proven liar. Hits the trifecta, yet she is in a prominent position.
You must be a politician (or a double glazing salesman). "Didn't you read the small print".
I'm enjoying the cognitive dissonance: - When there is a specific vote on a single issue, democracy means going into the potential motivations of various groups of voters and arguing what they meant. - When there is a general vote on a manifesto with hundreds of issues inside (under a system where it's not even questioned that voting has dozens of even non-manifesto issues, such as tribalism, exclusion of the leading other choice and so on, as shown by polling), democracy means taking that vote as completely supportive of whatever single element in there the arguer decides to select.
The solution to both this and the rest of the seemingly intractable problems with Brexit is simple and all-but-trivial: we move to the EEA, at least initially. It was designed as a half-way house between being outside the EU and being inside it, it's straightforward, and it's proven.
The Leavers insist it is "Brexit in name only", or some such drivel, but the referendum question was on leaving the EU and only on leaving the EU. It doesn't matter what some hardline Brexiteers want to claim the result "means" or doesn't mean; it doesn't matter what they want to claim is and isn't "real Brexit" - they've been insisting the country respects the democratic mandate, so they can also respect the democratic mandate. It says "leave the EU" and being outside the EU yet inside the EEA is leaving the EU. Just ask Norway - they seem to accept that EEA membership is not identical to EU membership. They've had two referendums on whether to change their status and insisted both times that they like it as-is just fine. EEA is NOT equivalent to EU.
If Leavers want a full-on hard/chaotic/crash Brexit (delete word as applicable), they can get a democratic mandate for it. Let them push for a further referendum on the destination, if they choose. We've chosen to leave the EU. Fine. Let's leave it for the most straightforward destination. One where we won't reignite the Troubles, or collapse supply-chains, or rip up and have to painstakingly redo hundreds on individual treaties ranging from airline airworthiness and landing rights to zoological cruelty standards. If we want to go further, we can do it from that position.
If Leavers want a second referendum, let them argue for it, or accept EEA status.
It's a question what you think voters want from Brexit (they focus on substance not form). EEA preserves some of the economic benefits of EU membership but doesn't change things like FoM and ECJ.
Fundamentally if the EU were to agree to free movement of labour (i.e. No work permit) rather than free movement of people (right to move look for a job) it could all be solved. I know this is big ask for the Eurocrats (turning back the ratchet( but it is essentially a shift back to pre Maastricht
But - the EEA isn't subject to the ECJ. I don't see how that's an issue? FoM - we could easily apply significantly more restrictions than we already do. If FoM was a key element of the answer, then we asked the wrong question in the first place. Notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 112-113 of the EEA Agreement, anyway.
My understanding was that EEA members had the choice whether or not to implement EU regulations but if they did the regulations were subject to the ECH. The EFTA agreement itself is subject to the EFTA court
.,.. The Irish need to be told very bluntly to get stuffed. There is going to be a border between NI and ROI whatever they do. They need to focus on how to make that border as unobtrusive as possible, but it is going to exist. Norway and Sweden manage it, the Irish need to start proper discussions rather than just acting as the EU Commissions little bitch.
Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by incompetence.
There is a solution - broadly what was proposed by the UK although I am sure that there are technical improvements that can be made.
If Ireland want to be disruptive so be it.
The British "solution" is essentially, deal with it, Ireland. It's long on "imaginative ways" Needless to say, the British expect the other side to be imaginative, not them.
As I mention below, I think a way out of the impasse is for the Irish to call the UK's bluff. Demonstrate how every item crossing the unmanned border will be EU compliant. You have the transition period to to come up with a solution and demonstrate that it works. This would take the sting out of the tail.
I think it's likely we'll stay in the Customs Union, but we're not in the place yet where everyone realises Brexit will entirely be an exercise in damage limitation. The Irish should give it time.
You have a system of trusted travelers (like Nexus between Canada and the US). You back that up with self-certification and deceleration. This is policed by spot checks and generous allowances did individuals.
You won't be able to guarantee 100% but there is already some leakage.
Fine, so let's go for that. The UK has the transition period to come up with a set of concrete and detailed proposals to ensure all goods crossing the unmanned border are EU compliant. Those proposals can be tested and if sufficiently robust, the deal goes ahead.
Which is what you figure out in detailed discussions around a trade deal and in transition
Silly question. I'm happy living in the EU but voted to Leave the EU. I'm happy with my nation and it is currently part of the EU.
You're happy living in the EU?
Ok.
Yes. I'd rather live here than in Africa for instance. The question means different things depending upon how you interpret it.
Brexiteer has painful accident as he transfers his dancing from the head to the point of a pin.
If you asked Scots "are you happy living in the UK" then I'd expect similar results. The question doesn't ask what you and the EU imply it does.
I'm not implying it means anything, hence my use of the word baffling.
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Not getting an increased happiness vibe tbh.
So we are only allowed to vote for change in your eyes if we are downtrodden and miserable? Would you argue the same for Scottish Independence etc?
Making folk feel a bit more happy than they already feel is precisely what 21st century western politics should be about. There is no reason in western nations that people can't already be happy but there's equally no reason we can't seek to make life even better.
The solution to both this and the rest of the seemingly intractable problems with Brexit is simple and all-but-trivial: we move to the EEA, at least initially. It was designed as a half-way house between being outside the EU and being inside it, it's straightforward, and it's proven.
The Leavers insist it is "Brexit in name only", or some such drivel, but the referendum question was on leaving the EU and only on leaving the EU. It doesn't matter what some hardline Brexiteers want to claim the result "means" or doesn't mean; it doesn't matter what they want to claim is and isn't "real Brexit" - they've been insisting the country respects the democratic mandate, so they can also respect the democratic mandate. It says "leave the EU" and being outside the EU yet inside the EEA is leaving the EU. Just ask Norway - they seem to accept that EEA membership is not identical to EU membership. They've had two referendums on whether to change their status and insisted both times that they like it as-is just fine. EEA is NOT equivalent to EU.
If Leavers want a full-on hard/chaotic/crash Brexit (delete word as applicable), they can get a democratic mandate for it. Let them push for a further referendum on the destination, if they choose. We've chosen to leave the EU. Fine. Let's leave it for the most straightforward destination. One where we won't reignite the Troubles, or collapse supply-chains, or rip up and have to painstakingly redo hundreds on individual treaties ranging from airline airworthiness and landing rights to zoological cruelty standards. If we want to go further, we can do it from that position.
If Leavers want a second referendum, let them argue for it, or accept EEA status.
That means, freedom to make trade deals, ending ECJ jurisdiction, extra controls on immigration, and saving budgetary contributions.
You can obtain small wins on most of those under EEA-EFTA, and absolutely on trade deals.
Indeed (albeit at least two of the claims on that leaflet are going to be hard-to-impossible to meet - there is no outcome that gives us "£350 million per week back" or "is safer" (this is definitely the safest option)). And we could even make it subject to a confirmatory referendum later on, as we did when we joined the Common Market initially, following the precedent of actually trying it out (and bypassing politicians lies on either side).
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British support for various unionist terror organizations and the army shooting dead 13 innocent civilians for demanding the rights that British citizens on the mainland took for granted.
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
The DUP is a Unionist party backing the Conservative and Unionist Party, that is rather different from a Liberal Party backing a Conservative Party as was the case in 2010.
The DUP won most votes and seats in NI on a platform of backing the May government's position on Brexit.
Now it's votes AND seats? Talk about moving goalposts....
At least you are making the case for a voting system that actually has a post.
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how annoyed Tmay makes the NI electorate, making a hard border or more likely, attempting to make one, either between the North and South, or along the Irish Sea will not be making anyone happy. While the DUP maintaining the Tories in power could backfire spectacularly (just ask any LibDem).
The DUP is a Unionist party backing the Conservative and Unionist Party, that is rather different from a Liberal Party backing a Conservative Party as was the case in 2010.
The DUP won most votes and seats in NI on a platform of backing the May government's position on Brexit.
Er! Please remind me, how many LibDem MP's were there in 2010 and how many now?
The question that Tory cheerleaders for lunacy refuse to answer - why have you turned your backs on free trade? Why are you trying to impose massive costs on British business? Why are you tell I g industry that it doesn't know what it's talking about when talking about the impacts of hard Brexit on their own industry?
As I said, political ELE. Once the Tories stop representing business and free trade, all they are left with is representing the interests of big capital - the bankers and hedge fund managers who own the party via their donations. Once the pretence of backing work has gone how will the party win the votes of working people which it needs for government? Hard to say "don't vote Labour they will bring about economic ruin" when you yourselves have just brought about economic ruin.
Small business is far keener on Brecit than big business and the City and small business represents the largest sector of workers involved in business in the UK
Only 21% of SMEs export so it can't be FTAs that attract them to Brexit.
More freedom from EU regulations and directives
I run a small business. I can't think of a single EU regulation I need freedom from. Which ones did you have in mind?
Only 200? There are probably 200 small firms in my council ward let alone the country. Which regulations will give me more freedom when they are withdrawn?
Perhaps you should have asked them before 52% of the country voted to leave the EU
The question that Tory cheerleaders for lunacy refuse to answer - why have you turned your backs on free trade? Why are you trying to impose massive costs on British business? Why are you tell I g industry that it doesn't know what it's talking about when talking about the impacts of hard Brexit on their own industry?
As I said, political ELE. Once the Tories stop representing business and free trade, all they are left with is representing the interests of big capital - the bankers and hedge fund managers who own the party via their donations. Once the pretence of backing work has gone how will the party win the votes of working people which it needs for government? Hard to say "don't vote Labour they will bring about economic ruin" when you yourselves have just brought about economic ruin.
Small business is far keener on Brecit than big business and the City and small business represents the largest sector of workers involved in business in the UK
Only 21% of SMEs export so it can't be FTAs that attract them to Brexit.
More freedom from EU regulations and directives
I run a small business. I can't think of a single EU regulation I need freedom from. Which ones did you have in mind?
Only 200? There are probably 200 small firms in my council ward let alone the country. Which regulations will give me more freedom when they are withdrawn?
Perhaps you should have asked them before 52% of the country voted to leave the EU
Forget all the stuff about the deposit being racist / seixst / disablist , I think all those wishing to stand for public office should have to pass an IQ test. They must also give the correct answer to questions on AV, acceptable pizza toppings and merits of Radiohead.
Oh and any that say iphoneX with iOS11 is great are banned from standing for life!
Respondents have a tendency to answer many questions with “I agree” or “yes,” regardless of the question’s content, a problem referred to as “acquiescence” (Iarossi 2006: 44–45). Therefore, by using only positively or negatively formulated choices, a survey can steer results in a desired direction.. QC15.4: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. You are happy living in the EU
The results of a survey may also be distorted by problematic question order. This occurs when questions posed earlier in an interview “seep” into later questions – particularly in consecutive questions. This phenomenon, which has frequently been demonstrated, is referred to in public opinion research as a contextual, halo, positioning or order effect. Consider the following example (Strack et al. 1988): American students were asked to rate their level of satisfaction in dating situations as well as their general satisfaction in life. The results of the two questions proved to be only very slightly positively correlated. However, if the question about dating was positioned directly before the question on general life satisfaction, the correlation became stronger (ibid.: 435). Thus, the activation of the previously requested information “seeped” into the response to the following question. In order to minimize contextual effects, pretests are necessary to ensure that questions are presented in a neutral, non-manipulative order. QC15: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. 15.1: You are happy with your family life 15.2: You are happy with your current occupation 15.3: You are happy living in [our country] 15.4: You are happy living in the EU
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
If you review your earlier post, you will see that you said "seats", not "votes".
Your conversion to the cause of fair votes is nevertheless welcome.
Though of course the SNP won a majority of seats at Holyrood on a manifesto commitment for an independence referendum in 2011 they did not get a majority of seats at Holyrood on a manifesto commitment for an independence referendum in 2016 and it is only at Holyrood the SNP will ever get a majority of seats, they will never get a majority of seats at Westminster.
(The Scottish Greens in their manifesto did not give a clear commitment to an independence referendum but said a referendum “should be determined by public appetite: Scotland should decide, when Scotland wants to decide. For example, a call for a referendum signed by up to 1m people on the electoral register”. “If a new referendum is to happen, it should come about by the will of the people, and not be driven by calculations of party political advantage.")
Article waffling on the history of how awful the Uk has behaved surprisingly doesn’t mention Dublin’s overt support for the Germans during WWII. Their behaviour during the 70s and 80s towards the terrorist gangster mobs should be to their eternal shame too.
Strong sense of deja vu for this latest tiff. The ROI are not a home nation and aren’t our friends.
Well, I could have mentioned all those Irishmen (like my own father and great-uncle) who fought for the Allies in both world wars and British
But that would have made the header too long.
And the point is that it is precisely because Ireland remembers that it does not want changes which risk the peace which has been hard-won.
It has often been said that the Irish remember too much. But the Enhlish should I think remember a little more.
what rubbish
the current spat is becasue we have a 38 year old PM in Ireland who takes the peace for granted and is prepared to play politics with the north to shore up his government
normally FG is the sensible party re Irish UK relations.
Varadkar however has deicded to play dice
this is not the UK stirring things up on Brexit but a weak taoiseach playing foreign adventures to make himself look tough
And when TMay goes on her weekly visit to HMQ and tells her that NI has decided to lose the N part and go under Dublin's Rule rather than Westminster's......
Clearly not given NI has twice given the unionist DUP most votes and seats in 2 post Brexit elections on a firm commitment to maintain the 'N' part and May is now reliant on that same DUP to stay in power.
Depends on how (just ask any LibDem).
The DUP is a Unionist party backing the Conservative and Unionist Party, that is rather different from a Liberal Party backing a Conservative Party as was the case in 2010.
The DUP won most votes and seats in NI on a platform of backing the May government's position on Brexit.
Er! Please remind me, how many LibDem MP's were there in 2010 and how many now?
As I said the LDs were a Liberal Party backing a Conservative Party that is distinct from the Democratic UNIONIST Party backing the Conservative and UNIONIST Party.
Forget all the stuff about the deposit being racist / seixst / disablist , I think all those wishing to stand for public office should have to pass an IQ test. They must also give the correct answer to questions on AV, acceptable pizza toppings and merits of Radiohead.
Oh and any that say iphoneX with iOS11 is great are banned from standing for life!
Don't know about the iphoneX, but the answers to the other three are surely:
AV: the pinnacle of democratic choice Pizza Topping: any fruit you like Radiohead: good band, but no Coldplay.
When do you let me know which safe seat I've been selected for?
Respondents have a tendency to answer many questions with “I agree” or “yes,” regardless of the question’s content, a problem referred to as “acquiescence” (Iarossi 2006: 44–45). Therefore, by using only positively or negatively formulated choices, a survey can steer results in a desired direction.. QC15.4: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. You are happy living in the EU
The results of a survey may also be distorted by problematic question order. This occurs when questions posed earlier in an interview “seep” into later questions – particularly in consecutive questions. This phenomenon, which has frequently been demonstrated, is referred to in public opinion research as a contextual, halo, positioning or order effect. Consider the following example (Strack et al. 1988): American students were asked to rate their level of satisfaction in dating situations as well as their general satisfaction in life. The results of the two questions proved to be only very slightly positively correlated. However, if the question about dating was positioned directly before the question on general life satisfaction, the correlation became stronger (ibid.: 435). Thus, the activation of the previously requested information “seeped” into the response to the following question. In order to minimize contextual effects, pretests are necessary to ensure that questions are presented in a neutral, non-manipulative order. QC15: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. 15.1: You are happy with your family life 15.2: You are happy with your current occupation 15.3: You are happy living in [our country] 15.4: You are happy living in the EU
Discussion is as lively as ever and no doubt will continue to be so for quite some time to come.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
All the best Big G! Look forward to your return
Thank you RoyalBlue - need to get back soon as I hope to do my 10,000 post before Nick (Palmer)
Silly question. I'm happy living in the EU but voted to Leave the EU. I'm happy with my nation and it is currently part of the EU.
You're happy living in the EU?
Ok.
Yes. I'd rather live here than in Africa for instance. The question means different things depending upon how you interpret it.
Brexiteer has painful accident as he transfers his dancing from the head to the point of a pin.
If you asked Scots "are you happy living in the UK" then I'd expect similar results. The question doesn't ask what you and the EU imply it does.
I'm not implying it means anything, hence my use of the word baffling.
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Not getting an increased happiness vibe tbh.
So we are only allowed to vote for change in your eyes if we are downtrodden and miserable? Would you argue the same for Scottish Independence etc?
Making folk feel a bit more happy than they already feel is precisely what 21st century western politics should be about. There is no reason in western nations that people can't already be happy but there's equally no reason we can't seek to make life even better.
Pretty sure that many totalitarian dictators also had a general intention to make 'the people' happy, as long as those people were of the right class, race, ideological bent etc. The question of how many eggs should be broken to make that omelette of happiness always has to be asked though.
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago? What particular metrics of future happiness will be you be using to prove that your Brexit bridge to Shangri La is more than an illusion?
The previous Taoiseach, the 66-year-old Enda Kenny, was less clever and articulate than his successor, but he was experienced and wily, as well as accommodating, and was given to defusing rather than exacerbating tension. With Anglo-Irish relations better than they had ever been, Brexit came as a shock to the Irish government, but Mr Kenny set out to be constructive by initiating work on electronic border technology that Mr Varadkar then cancelled. https://www.ft.com/content/eabdd85c-d12b-11e7-b781-794ce08b24dc
Discussion is as lively as ever and no doubt will continue to be so for quite some time to come.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
Pretty sure that many totalitarian dictators also had a general intention to make 'the people' happy, as long as those people were of the right class, race, ideological bent etc. The question of how many eggs should be broken to make that omelette of happiness always has to be asked though.
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago? What particular metrics of future happiness will be you be using to prove that your Brexit bridge to Shangri La is more than an illusion?
The issue with totalitarian dictators is not their intention to make people happier, it is the fact that they are totalitarian dictators rather than liberal democrats.
I don't think the UK is either especially happier or sadder than it was 18 months ago. Nor lacking a Tardis or portal to a parallel dimension is there a metric to prove that Brexit was better or worse than the alternative.
I do however believe that long-term I have faith in the British people to make laws that suit themselves well more than I have faith in Eurozone politicians to set laws that suit Britain.
Silly question. I'm happy living in the EU but voted to Leave the EU. I'm happy with my nation and it is currently part of the EU.
You're happy living in the EU?
Ok.
Yes. I'd rather live here than in Africa for instance. The question means different things depending upon how you interpret it.
Brexiteer has painful accident as he transfers his dancing from the head to the point of a pin.
If you asked Scots "are you happy living in the UK" then I'd expect similar results. The question doesn't ask what you and the EU imply it does.
I'm not implying it means anything, hence my use of the word baffling.
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Not getting an increased happiness vibe tbh.
So we are only allowed to vote for change in your eyes if we are downtrodden and miserable? Would you argue the same for Scottish Independence etc?
Making folk feel a bit more happy than they already feel is precisely what 21st century western politics should be about. There is no reason in western nations that people can't already be happy but there's equally no reason we can't seek to make life even better.
Pretty sure that many totalitarian dictators also had a general intention to make 'the people' happy, as long as those people were of the right class, race, ideological bent etc. The question of how many eggs should be broken to make that omelette of happiness always has to be asked though.
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago? What particular metrics of future happiness will be you be using to prove that your Brexit bridge to Shangri La is more than an illusion?
I'm happy reading the remain post on here this morning and since we voted leave the EU,the desperation is just brilliant in the post/Threads.
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
If you review your earlier post, you will see that you said "seats", not "votes".
Your conversion to the cause of fair votes is nevertheless welcome.
Though of course the SNP won a majority of seats at Holyrood on a manifesto commitment for an independence referendum in 2011 they did not get a majority of seats at Holyrood on a manifesto commitment for an independence referendum in 2016 and it is only at Holyrood the SNP will ever get a majority of seats, they will never get a majority of seats at Westminster.
(The Scottish Greens in their manifesto did not give a clear commitment to an independence referendum but said a referendum “should be determined by public appetite: Scotland should decide, when Scotland wants to decide. For example, a call for a referendum signed by up to 1m people on the electoral register”. “If a new referendum is to happen, it should come about by the will of the people, and not be driven by calculations of party political advantage.")
Though of course...your earlier post was wrong?
You are at least helping to illustrate why your local town council was maybe a challenge too far?
Pretty sure that many totalitarian dictators also had a general intention to make 'the people' happy, as long as those people were of the right class, race, ideological bent etc. The question of how many eggs should be broken to make that omelette of happiness always has to be asked though.
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago? What particular metrics of future happiness will be you be using to prove that your Brexit bridge to Shangri La is more than an illusion?
The issue with totalitarian dictators is not their intention to make people happier, it is the fact that they are totalitarian dictators rather than liberal democrats.
I don't think the UK is either especially happier or sadder than it was 18 months ago. Nor lacking a Tardis or portal to a parallel dimension is there a metric to prove that Brexit was better or worse than the alternative.
I do however believe that long-term I have faith in the British people to make laws that suit themselves well more than I have faith in Eurozone politicians to set laws that suit Britain.
I see president macron is busy tackling the most pressings issues in France, reform of labour laws, nope, Islamic extemism, nope, wolf whistling, yeah, all over that one, going to criminalise it.
Forget all the stuff about the deposit being racist / seixst / disablist , I think all those wishing to stand for public office should have to pass an IQ test. They must also give the correct answer to questions on AV, acceptable pizza toppings and merits of Radiohead.
Oh and any that say iphoneX with iOS11 is great are banned from standing for life!
iphoneX: an abomination AV: an abomination Radiohead: an abomination (there is no merit to radiohead, and coldplay are worse) Pizza Topping: no cheese - melted cheese does disastrous things to my guts so I must avoid
Silly question. I'm happy living in the EU but voted to Leave the EU. I'm happy with my nation and it is currently part of the EU.
You're happy living in the EU?
Ok.
Yes. I'd rather live here than in Africa for instance. The question means different things depending upon how you interpret it.
Brexiteer has painful accident as he transfers his dancing from the head to the point of a pin.
If you asked Scots "are you happy living in the UK" then I'd expect similar results. The question doesn't ask what you and the EU imply it does.
I'm not implying it means anything, hence my use of the word baffling.
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Not getting an increased happiness vibe tbh.
So we are only allowed to vote for change in your eyes if we are downtrodden and miserable? Would you argue the same for Scottish Independence etc?
Making folk feel a bit more happy than they already feel is precisely what 21st century western politics should be about. There is no reason in western nations that people can't already be happy but there's equally no reason we can't seek to make life even better.
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago?
Speaking of happiness, here's one bunch of lads that are positively ecstatic.
'I went to the DUP Conference and what I found was disturbingly familiar – this is our new Ukip
...So total is the destruction of what passes for British politics at the moment, it is occasionally overlooked that there is one small party that has emerged not merely unscathed but utterly triumphant from its smoking wreckage.
To arrive at a party conference that is not some dystopian carnival of division, disappointment and resentfulness is decidedly odd these days. The DUP has never quite had it so good.
It campaigned for Brexit. It got it. And by virtue of some truly unlikely political maths, it holds the balance of power in Westminster and has a highly controversial £1.5bn in its back pocket to show for it'
This Irish border question has been getting worse with the new boy:
A new cold wind has been blowing from Dublin this week on the vexed issue of the Irish land border. The previous Irish position of preparing for a technological solution to minimise border disruption has been overturned. Enda Kenny, Taoiseach until June, had implicitly accepted that a border would be necessary, and had begun preparations, along with the British, to minimise disruption. Quiet contacts had been taking place between officials north and south of the border. As the new Fine Gael government team led by Leo Varadkar has found its feet all of that has begun to change.
First the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, said that no border is acceptable. Another government spokesman said that no technological solutions could make a border acceptable. Then in Brussels last week, Leo Varadkar said that the border was Britain’s not Ireland’s problem and that Irish work on technological solutions would cease.
I could see an EEA arrangement with a figleaf on Freedom of Movement. The government would big up the figleaf. This depends on the British wanting to extract themselves from the mess they have put themselves into and the EU wanting to keep the UK onside. I think both are probable eventually, but we're not there yet. The clusterfuck needs to play out somewhat further.
I come back to an observation Juncker made in comparing Cameron with Gorbachev as the two 'great destroyers' he had met, who destroyed, respectively, the USSR and the UK.
That would be the UK still standing over a year since Cameron left and saw unionist parties win most votes in all 4 countries of the UK at the post Brexit general election?
So what? European Unionist parties won a landslide in 2015. How did that turn out?
The Tories had a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the EU in 2015 which they delivered when they won an overall majority of seats in the UK at that general election.
No party with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on leaving the UK won a majority of seats in any of the 4 countries of the UK at the 2017 general election.
Scotland?
The Unionist Tories, Labour and LD parties won 63% of Scottish votes. In 2015 the pro EU referendum Tories and UKIP won 50% of UK votes.
If you review your earlier post, you will see that you said "seats", not "votes".
Your conversion to the cause of fair votes is nevertheless welcome.
Though of course the SNP political advantage.")
Though of course...your earlier post was wrong?
You are at least helping to illustrate why your local town council was maybe a challenge too far?
In the sense that the SNP did not win a majority of votes in 2017 nor did it win the majority of seats it needed in 2016 for an independence referendum no it was not wrong.
As for my town council challenge I got almost 40% of the vote, am on the candidates list for the District council elections next year and am likely to be elected to the town council in 2019 when all seats are up.
Comments
Perhaps they looked at Brexiteer Brits and assumed that their easygoing, placid contentment applies in every political outcome, so a differentiated question wasn't required.
If there is one thing that we learn from Brexit, it is that tubthumping, nationalistic flagwaving beats anodyne economic issues.
The DUP won most votes and seats in NI on a platform of backing the May government's position on Brexit.
I think the difference betwwen us and those further right on the scale is that we are net contributors, while they are net recipients.
That, and also that many people are not that bothered.
I hope that common sense prevails and the EU move on to trade in December
Anything else could open a pandora's box of trouble for the EU and the UK
However, I hope everyone continues their arguments, sometimes heated (even very heated) but do so constructively, not destructively.
I am signing off shortly for 48 hours or so for my operation tomorrow but will be back to continue reading and occasionally contributing to the politics and economics in these unprecedented times
http://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-areas-with-low-immigration-voted-mainly-for-brexit-62138
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/26/transgender-anarchist-book-fair-transphobia-row
Still, interesting to discover that a referendum that we were told was the most important democratic decision any of us would make in our lifetimes, that would shape the very foundations of this country's future, that caused the murder of an mp, that caused a rise in racist hate crime (in England), that encouraged national newspapers to call people traitors and saboteurs, that has caused so much division that another referendum cannot be considered, was just about folk feeling a bit more happy than they already feel.
Not getting an increased happiness vibe tbh.
- When there is a specific vote on a single issue, democracy means going into the potential motivations of various groups of voters and arguing what they meant.
- When there is a general vote on a manifesto with hundreds of issues inside (under a system where it's not even questioned that voting has dozens of even non-manifesto issues, such as tribalism, exclusion of the leading other choice and so on, as shown by polling), democracy means taking that vote as completely supportive of whatever single element in there the arguer decides to select.
Your conversion to the cause of fair votes is nevertheless welcome.
If you want to look at what is wrong with our political system, dawn butler is a great example. Thick as shit, expense fiddler, and proven liar. Hits the trifecta, yet she is in a prominent position.
Making folk feel a bit more happy than they already feel is precisely what 21st century western politics should be about. There is no reason in western nations that people can't already be happy but there's equally no reason we can't seek to make life even better.
And we could even make it subject to a confirmatory referendum later on, as we did when we joined the Common Market initially, following the precedent of actually trying it out (and bypassing politicians lies on either side).
At least you are making the case for a voting system that actually has a post.
https://twitter.com/EddieBarnes23/status/934775502593839104
Oh and any that say iphoneX with iOS11 is great are banned from standing for life!
Respondents have a tendency to answer many questions with “I agree” or “yes,” regardless of the question’s content, a problem referred to as “acquiescence” (Iarossi 2006: 44–45). Therefore, by using only positively or negatively formulated choices, a survey can steer results in a desired direction..
QC15.4: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. You are happy living in the EU
The results of a survey may also be distorted by problematic question order. This occurs when questions posed earlier in an interview “seep” into later questions – particularly in consecutive questions. This phenomenon, which has frequently been demonstrated, is referred to in public opinion research as a contextual, halo, positioning or order effect. Consider the following example (Strack et al. 1988): American students were asked to rate their level of satisfaction in dating situations as well as their general satisfaction in life. The results of the two questions proved to be only very slightly positively correlated. However, if the question about dating was positioned directly before the question on general life satisfaction, the correlation became stronger (ibid.: 435). Thus, the activation of the previously requested information “seeped” into the response to the following question. In order to minimize contextual effects, pretests are necessary to ensure that questions are presented in a neutral, non-manipulative order.
QC15: Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.
15.1: You are happy with your family life
15.2: You are happy with your current occupation
15.3: You are happy living in [our country]
15.4: You are happy living in the EU
(The Scottish Greens in their manifesto did not give a clear commitment to an independence referendum but said a referendum “should be determined by public appetite: Scotland should decide, when Scotland wants to decide. For example, a call for a referendum signed by up to 1m people on the electoral register”.
“If a new referendum is to happen, it should come about by the will of the people, and not be driven by calculations of party political advantage.")
AV: the pinnacle of democratic choice
Pizza Topping: any fruit you like
Radiohead: good band, but no Coldplay.
When do you let me know which safe seat I've been selected for?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
Would you say the UK is a happier place now than it was 18 months ago? What particular metrics of future happiness will be you be using to prove that your Brexit bridge to Shangri La is more than an illusion?
The previous Taoiseach, the 66-year-old Enda Kenny, was less clever and articulate than his successor, but he was experienced and wily, as well as accommodating, and was given to defusing rather than exacerbating tension. With Anglo-Irish relations better than they had ever been, Brexit came as a shock to the Irish government, but Mr Kenny set out to be constructive by initiating work on electronic border technology that Mr Varadkar then cancelled.
https://www.ft.com/content/eabdd85c-d12b-11e7-b781-794ce08b24dc
I don't think the UK is either especially happier or sadder than it was 18 months ago. Nor lacking a Tardis or portal to a parallel dimension is there a metric to prove that Brexit was better or worse than the alternative.
I do however believe that long-term I have faith in the British people to make laws that suit themselves well more than I have faith in Eurozone politicians to set laws that suit Britain.
You are at least helping to illustrate why your local town council was maybe a challenge too far?
AV: an abomination
Radiohead: an abomination (there is no merit to radiohead, and coldplay are worse)
Pizza Topping: no cheese - melted cheese does disastrous things to my guts so I must avoid
Yes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/26/uk-has-got-happier-since-brexit-vote-does-area-rank/
http://www.larazon.es/binrepository/video_content_7531628_20171126035912.pdf
NEW THREAD
'I went to the DUP Conference and what I found was disturbingly familiar – this is our new Ukip
...So total is the destruction of what passes for British politics at the moment, it is occasionally overlooked that there is one small party that has emerged not merely unscathed but utterly triumphant from its smoking wreckage.
To arrive at a party conference that is not some dystopian carnival of division, disappointment and resentfulness is decidedly odd these days. The DUP has never quite had it so good.
It campaigned for Brexit. It got it. And by virtue of some truly unlikely political maths, it holds the balance of power in Westminster and has a highly controversial £1.5bn in its back pocket to show for it'
https://tinyurl.com/yab74f8g
Those with a hypersensitivity to metropolitan sneering should read no further.
A new cold wind has been blowing from Dublin this week on the vexed issue of the Irish land border. The previous Irish position of preparing for a technological solution to minimise border disruption has been overturned. Enda Kenny, Taoiseach until June, had implicitly accepted that a border would be necessary, and had begun preparations, along with the British, to minimise disruption. Quiet contacts had been taking place between officials north and south of the border. As the new Fine Gael government team led by Leo Varadkar has found its feet all of that has begun to change.
First the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, said that no border is acceptable. Another government spokesman said that no technological solutions could make a border acceptable. Then in Brussels last week, Leo Varadkar said that the border was Britain’s not Ireland’s problem and that Irish work on technological solutions would cease.
https://policyexchange.org.uk/irish-border-and-brexit/
As for my town council challenge I got almost 40% of the vote, am on the candidates list for the District council elections next year and am likely to be elected to the town council in 2019 when all seats are up.