Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Blow for LAB as YouGov finds Corbyn’s approach to Brexit getti

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited March 2 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Blow for LAB as YouGov finds Corbyn’s approach to Brexit getting just 24% support

While all the attention today has been on Theresa Mays big Brexit speech we’ve now got the first polling reaction from YouGov to Mr Corbyn’s statements earlier in the week. Although this was covered widely by the media on Monday the general reaction has been fairly negative for the Labour leader. Just 24% said they support the approach that he is taking with 43% saying they oppose.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    edited March 2
    Fascinating.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    Primus inter pares
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675
    And Corbyn is clueless on his position anyway.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,250
    edited March 2
    Quartus
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    I imagine that voters rumbled the fact that Corbyn's switch of position was a cynical piece of political theatre driven entirely by focus-group, and largely meaningless as a result.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815
    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,547
    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve.

    Yes: there are a great many private equity companies that like to back great businesses. But there are also many that buy stable business, cut capital expenditure, and load the resulting business up with debt. (It's not just private equity, of course. Tata Steel bought Port Talbot, and slashed capex to get dividends out.)

    These are great strategies for near term financial return and to meet the maturity profiles of the average private equity firm (in and out in six years). But they are not necessarily the best for the long-term success of an economy.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,586
    TGOHF said:

    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.

    Peak Corbyn? :p
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,250
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve.

    Yes: there are a great many private equity companies that like to back great businesses. But there are also many that buy stable business, cut capital expenditure, and load the resulting business up with debt. (It's not just private equity, of course. Tata Steel bought Port Talbot, and slashed capex to get dividends out.)

    These are great strategies for near term financial return and to meet the maturity profiles of the average private equity firm (in and out in six years). But they are not necessarily the best for the long-term success of an economy.
    One of the good things about BEPS is that it will make the excessive debt model of private equity less viable by taking away tax deductibility for very high levels of interest expense.

    It’s amazing. Global tax regulation emerging from a body other than the EU! It’s almost like the UK will still be able to cooperate multilaterally after Brexit.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675
    edited March 2

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    The media seem to be reporting it has generally been welcomed and has gone some way to address the ultra remainers and leavers

    Listening to Corbyn tonight he hasn't a clue and would not have been able to undertake such a complex and thought through speech in a month of Sundays
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,848
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve. ..
    Obviously not... if that were your name, you'd know how to spell it.
    :smile:
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    DavidL said...

    "The United States has been running serious deficits for decades. Much of this is because those on the west coast in particular sought to offshore manufacturing to enhance their profits. They were able to do this because of “free trade”. The result was the hollowing out of significant parts of the US , in particular the rust bucket states that swung the election Trump’s way. It has also massively undermined US power. The geeks of California have done incredibly well out of free trade and have bought politicians to promote it. But they have done terrible damage to the US."

    You and I agree that the geeks have done well out of free trade. But it's worth remembering that - other than Apple - the other tech giants aren't really in the manufacturing business. (Intel is in the manufacturing business, and its biggest fabs are in Oregan, Ireland, Israel and Singapore.)

    So, your contention that they chose to fuck over Middle America doesn't really hold water.

    (Also, the US runs trade deficits for the same reason we do: they save too little and spend too much.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    TGOHF said:

    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.

    All right HYUFD, we'll buy it. How did you hack this account?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,848

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Of course it can.
    Think of it as arranging a (much) longer transition period.....

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,799
    Ahem.

    MarqueeMark
    February 26

    "The locals might yet be impacted by the narrative of Labour simply playing politics with Brexit for party political gain, rather than what is about negotiating the best deal with Brussels.

    For example, what Corbyn says today is meaningless, unless he says how much he is prepared to pay Brussels for his/a/the Customs Union. And if he is pledging it is going to be "full tariff-free", as the BBC reports, then that looks like no change in our relationship with the EU. How well is that going to play with those Labour Brexit voters in Leeds?"
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    RoyalBlue said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve.

    Yes: there are a great many private equity companies that like to back great businesses. But there are also many that buy stable business, cut capital expenditure, and load the resulting business up with debt. (It's not just private equity, of course. Tata Steel bought Port Talbot, and slashed capex to get dividends out.)

    These are great strategies for near term financial return and to meet the maturity profiles of the average private equity firm (in and out in six years). But they are not necessarily the best for the long-term success of an economy.
    One of the good things about BEPS is that it will make the excessive debt model of private equity less viable by taking away tax deductibility for very high levels of interest expense.

    It’s amazing. Global tax regulation emerging from a body other than the EU! It’s almost like the UK will still be able to cooperate multilaterally after Brexit.
    BEPS is good.

    Early on in his Presidency, Trump planned to get rid of the tax deductability of interest, which would have done more to prevent the hollowing out of American industry than anything else. Sadly, he flunked it.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,957
    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.

    Peak Corbyn? :p
    That makes the assumption that Brexit would be the key salient issue in 2022. That was far from being the case in 2017 - people are sick to death of an issue most find to be very technical.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 5,114
    edited March 2
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve.

    Yes: there are a great many private equity companies that like to back great businesses. But there are also many that buy stable business, cut capital expenditure, and load the resulting business up with debt. (It's not just private equity, of course. Tata Steel bought Port Talbot, and slashed capex to get dividends out.)

    These are great strategies for near term financial return and to meet the maturity profiles of the average private equity firm (in and out in six years). But they are not necessarily the best for the long-term success of an economy.
    The success of any economy depends ultimately on increasing productivity. Private equity contributes both by investing in growing firms that contribute to productivity (like Airbnb or Uber) and recycling the capital of those which are failing, either through inefficiency or just being in a declining industry (eg CD sales).

  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,905


    The media seem to be reporting it has generally been welcomed and has gone some way to address the ultra remainers and leavers

    To offer a contrasting view from the pro-Government apologist, I thought the speech was long on generalities and short on specifics.

    It was still despite the opening part full of the UK believing it can have all the advantages of the SM and CU without much in the way of disbenefit.

    The extent to which some of us who voted LEAVE will be content with the continuing cat's cradle of ties to the EU remains to be seen.

    I do welcome May's assertion we won't get into a race to the bottom in terms of environmental standards and workers' rights - I just don't believe much of the Conservative Party supports that and will water down those commitments at the first opportunity.

    All in all, a re-assertion of the fundamental tenets of Mayism - her almost mystical affection for the Union and a desperate desire to keep everyone "in the tent".

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,547

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    The media seem to be reporting it has generally been welcomed and has gone some way to address the ultra remainers and leavers

    Listening to Corbyn tonight he hasn't a clue and would not have been able to undertake such a complex and thought through speech in a month of Sundays
    I’ve come to distrust media responses.
    Too much groupthink and hysteria.

    As for Corbyn, I am not and have never been a fan.

    Does anyone else think we seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    It’s a sort of Irish Free State vs Irish Republic argument from about 1920 I guess, as an analogy. Soft or hard so to speak. The Free Staters ( as I understand it) accepted compromise ( some alignment in Brexit parlance) in order to get out and “go from there”. De Valera et al wanted all the cake up front.

    They remain aligned to this day in terms of the labour market, or driving on the left, but slowly but at times radically diverged as time went by and circumstances changed. Some major, like neutrality in the war, declaring the Republic in 1949, unpegging the currency in 1979 ,to the trivial like kph not mph on the road signs.

    The point is they had the control to do it, align and take the “easy” route, or decide to diverge and take some consequences- good or not so good.
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 1,767
    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.

    Peak Corbyn? :p
    been and gone.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    edited March 2

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    rcs1000 said:

    Not all US glass companies have failed.

    "Corning Glass Inc has a rich history of innovation starting with lightbulb glass in the late 19th century to modern cell phone glass today. Our investors experience a reliable dividend and explosive growth with each new invention. We have approximately 35000 employees worldwide and $10B in sales."

    Corning invested, and prospered.

    Other companies got owned by private equity, who dramatically reduced investment to pay themselves dividends. This doomed the plants to early obsolescence.

    It was not Free Trade that fucked Lancaster, Ohio, but the short sightedness and greed of financiers with NetJets subscriptions.
    Private equity may chose to risk investment or to milk their earlier investment depending on the prospects for the business. Private equity are currently investing vast billions in the likes of Airbnb, Tesla and Uber for example.
    David: I used to work at Goldman Sachs. I'm the CFO of one of the world's leading sports technology companies. I've had a lot to do with private equity over the years. I am not nieve.

    Yes: there are a great many private equity companies that like to back great businesses. But there are also many that buy stable business, cut capital expenditure, and load the resulting business up with debt. (It's not just private equity, of course. Tata Steel bought Port Talbot, and slashed capex to get dividends out.)

    These are great strategies for near term financial return and to meet the maturity profiles of the average private equity firm (in and out in six years). But they are not necessarily the best for the long-term success of an economy.
    The success of any economy depends ultimately on increasing productivity. Private equity contributes both by investing in growing firms that contribute to productivity (like Airbnb or Uber) and recycling the capital of those which are failing, either through inefficiency or just being in a declining industry.

    Yes.

    (Although you dramatically overstate the proportion of private equity money invested in growth businesses. Go download the reports for the Blackstone, KKR, Apax and Bain buyout funds if you don't believe me.)

    But you need to remember externalities.

    It might be that the money tied up in that steel mill in Pittsburgh could be better used investing in AirBnB. But if your actions close the major employer in a town, then the state is left to pick up the (expensive) pieces.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    Semper ubi sub ubi.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,547
    welshowl said:

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    It’s a sort of Irish Free State vs Irish Republic argument from about 1920 I guess, as an analogy. Soft or hard so to speak. The Free Staters ( as I understand it) accepted compromise ( some alignment in Brexit parlance) in order to get out and “go from there”. De Valera et al wanted all the cake up front.

    They remain aligned to this day in terms of the labour market, or driving on the left, but slowly but at times radically diverged as time went by and circumstances changed. Some major, like neutrality in the war, declaring the Republic in 1949, unpegging the currency in 1979 ,to the trivial like kph not mph on the road signs.

    The point is they had the control to do it, align and take the “easy” route, or decide to diverge and take some consequences- good or not so good.
    It’s a god analogy but Ireland was an economic colony of the U.K. until the EU came along and gave them other options.

    Are we heading toward economic vassaldom?
  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 621
    Corbyn's no longer authentic on Brexit and the public knows it.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,436

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    Don't forget that EEA nations are even more integrated with the EU being in the Single Market yet they're not only free to sign their own FTAs they have done. Why can't we?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675

    Corbyn's no longer authentic on Brexit and the public knows it.

    He looks completely out of his depth
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    edited March 2
    On a serious note re Corbyn, there are a number of potential pitfalls. First, he is 69. If he doesn't become PM in the next 18 months he will be the oldest ever first time PM, on the back of zero experience and limited administrative ability. Hard to believe this would not become an issue.

    Second, while he is admirably clever at being all things to all men, that lasts until he has to make decisions. Can he really put them off for four years?

    Third, his team still look like a bunch of inept lightweights who with the possible exceptions of Starmer and Macdonnell would have been considered over-promoted as a sub-postmaster in Dyffryn Ardudwy. While there is talent on the Labour benches at the moment, either they are not willing to serve or he is not willing to use them. This leads to about a gaffe a week.

    However, that said, no party since 1865 has improved its position at an election after losing seats previously without a spell in opposition. May herself will be in her mid-60s and is already looking rather stale. So a Conservative landslide is clearly very unlikely unless something dramatic comes out. Considering that Corbyn has survived lying about his links with the IRA and Iran and his deputy taking half a million from a fascist propagandist, it's hard to see what that could be.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,536
    edited March 2
    Article contains important mistake / typo:

    It should say:

    38% of REMAIN voters back Corbyn’s approach with 31% opposing

    (13% of Leave voters back Corbyn’s approach with 61% opposing)

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    Semper ubi sub ubi.
    Nah, they couldn't, they were all Highlanders at Mons Graupius.

    (Yes, I know kilts weren't invented then!)
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,536
    Figures for own supporters only:

    77% of Con supporters back May Brexit approach

    56% of Lab supporters back Corbyn Brexit approach
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675
    It would be so ironic if Starmer and Corbyn's alleged collusion with the EU backfired on them spectacularly as seems possible
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 903
    MikeL said:

    Article contains important mistake / typo:

    It should say:

    38% of REMAIN voters back Corbyn’s approach with 31% opposing

    (13% of Leave voters back Corbyn’s approach with 61% opposing)

    What exactly were they agreeing with or opposing - not staying in the single market or remaining in the or a customs union or the related supposed ending in some form of state aid and other restrictions the EU might put on delivering a Corbyn socialist nirvana. I am not sure even the Labour Party understands what their policy means in practice.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    Anecdote from Conservative Research Assistant in 1997 good for John Major rather less so for Jacob Rees Mogg

    https://mobile.twitter.com/jamesmb/status/969567276017029120
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488



    So you are going on assumptions, and not evidence. Never a good way to change the electoral process.

    The electoral process is a balance between sometimes-contradictory requirements. If you change one thing, you need to consider who that change will affect the other requirements. That's what I'm concerned has not been done.

    You may take the 'minimum necessary measures' to make personation more difficult, and prevent many registered voters from voting. That'd be worse for the electoral process in many ways. We need to get the balance right.

    On the contrary, the essence of crime prevention is to accept and act on certain general assumptions about human nature, and to do that in advance of any specific evidence. Going back to the front door example: say you are designing a house in a country where you have never previously lived and know next to nothing about. You put locks on the doors, on the assumption that burglary is a thing in this new country because it is everywhere else. If you wait for evidence on which to base your decision, you have failed, because the most likely and convincing evidence that people are going to burgle your house, is that people burgle your house. My contention is that arrangements to prevent personation can be as cheap and effective as putting locks on your doors. It isn't free, and it isn't unproblematic (because you lock yourself out 100 times for every one time you exclude a potential burglar, but worth it.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    FPT

    Finally catching up on the speech.

    It felt like May at her best: comprehensive, detailed, and hitting all the One Nation notes. Of course, this should have happened a year ago but it seems that she’s had to wait for the thicker Brexiters (most of them, to be fair) to educate themselves on the reality of the situation.

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    It’s a sort of Irish Free State vs Irish Republic argument from about 1920 I guess, as an analogy. Soft or hard so to speak. The Free Staters ( as I understand it) accepted compromise ( some alignment in Brexit parlance) in order to get out and “go from there”. De Valera et al wanted all the cake up front.

    They remain aligned to this day in terms of the labour market, or driving on the left, but slowly but at times radically diverged as time went by and circumstances changed. Some major, like neutrality in the war, declaring the Republic in 1949, unpegging the currency in 1979 ,to the trivial like kph not mph on the road signs.

    The point is they had the control to do it, align and take the “easy” route, or decide to diverge and take some consequences- good or not so good.
    It’s a god analogy but Ireland was an economic colony of the U.K. until the EU came along and gave them other options.

    Are we heading toward economic vassaldom?
    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    Corbyn looks to have failed to convince Remainers while annoying Leavers with his Customs Union pledge.

    May still has Leavers on her side while making a few concessions to Remainers today
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,019
    Compare and contrast:

    ' Mortgage interest rates have barely shifted despite the rate rise, with the average new secured loan costing 1.96pc. That compares with a rate of 2.02pc in December, 1.92pc in October and 2pc in August, while two years ago the average new mortgage came with an interest rate of 2.47pc. '

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/03/01/housing-market-bounces-back-mortgage-rates-stay-low-despite/

    ' House price growth would be hit by at least ten per cent and as much as 18 per cent, making homeowners poorer. There wouldn’t be good news for young people trying to get on the housing ladder, though, because mortgages would be harder to get and more expensive. '

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/22/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-brexit-would-put-our-economy-in/
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 903

    Corbyn's no longer authentic on Brexit and the public knows it.

    It's partly because he wasn't authentic in the referendum campaign that leave won. The entire Labour machine was not put in place to support remain as despite saying otherwise Corbyn was at best ambivalent and perhaps even dishonest. He clearly did not believe in what he was saying in his pro remain speeches.

    He had been joining Skinner and co in the anti EU lobby for 30 years - all that changed was he became Leader so couldn't carry on taking that view.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    Ishmael_Z said:



    So you are going on assumptions, and not evidence. Never a good way to change the electoral process.

    The electoral process is a balance between sometimes-contradictory requirements. If you change one thing, you need to consider who that change will affect the other requirements. That's what I'm concerned has not been done.

    You may take the 'minimum necessary measures' to make personation more difficult, and prevent many registered voters from voting. That'd be worse for the electoral process in many ways. We need to get the balance right.

    On the contrary, the essence of crime prevention is to accept and act on certain general assumptions about human nature, and to do that in advance of any specific evidence. Going back to the front door example: say you are designing a house in a country where you have never previously lived and know next to nothing about. You put locks on the doors, on the assumption that burglary is a thing in this new country because it is everywhere else. If you wait for evidence on which to base your decision, you have failed, because the most likely and convincing evidence that people are going to burgle your house, is that people burgle your house. My contention is that arrangements to prevent personation can be as cheap and effective as putting locks on your doors. It isn't free, and it isn't unproblematic (because you lock yourself out 100 times for every one time you exclude a potential burglar, but worth it.
    Is your ratio 100?

    I.e., it's OK to disenfranchise 100 regular voters to prevent one fraudulent one?

    Because, really, this whole discussion should be about what the right ratio is.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488
    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,773
    edited March 2
    My take on May's speech. We are now seeing intimations of reality, if not the actual reality. These proposed solutions are still not realistic but we can see where the compromises will be made. The speech was fine.. Mrs May can't stand up and say, Brexit is a total waste of time, money and potential, we're stuck with this mess, so I am completely focused on damage limitation. Single Market and Customs Union , right now. The collapse would be total. She can't say it.

    Yet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,586
    FF43 said:

    My take on May's speech. We are now seeing intimations of reality, if not the actual reality. These proposed solutions are still not realistic but we can see where the compromises will be made. Probably it was OK. Mrs May can't stand up and say, Brexit is waste of time, money and potential, we're stuck with this mess, so I am completely focused on damage limitation. Single Market and Customs Union , right now. The collapse would be total. She can't say it.

    Yet.

    You still think the UK will be in the Single Market after it is all wrapped up?
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,106
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    FPT

    However - and there is a however - I’m not clear on the dynamics. What this *looks* like is an offer to mirror the EU customs union and trading regulations almost entirely in order to retain very close access to the single market.
    FS and digital services were the only areas where she suggested the U.K. would want to deviate.

    Let’s be honest, first, that this amounts to a recognition that a properly hard Brexit would be very economically damaging.

    But some questions do follow, and I think Lilico gets this.
    - What happens when the EU creates new rules? Presumably we are forced to mirror, or lose access to a particular market sector.
    - If we are so closely aligned to the EU, what else do we have to trade in potential FTAs? If we want to allow in lesser-regulated hairdryers from China, say, then we’d be undercutting our own hairdryer manufacturers who are forced to follow regulations mirroring EU ones.

    Surely Brexit can’t mean a kind of fictional sovereignty, based on no deviation from a EU we no longer have a voice in, and with no other FTAs to compensate...

    Or can it?

    It’s a sort of Irish Free State vs Irish Republic argument from about 1920 I guess, as an analogy. Soft or hard so to speak. The Free Staters ( as I understand it) accepted compromise ( some alignment in Brexit parlance) in order to get out and “go from there”. De Valera et al wanted all the cake up front.

    They remain aligned to this day in terms of the labour market, or driving on the left, but slowly but at times radically diverged as time went by and circumstances changed. Some major, like neutrality in the war, declaring the Republic in 1949, unpegging the currency in 1979 ,to the trivial like kph not mph on the road signs.

    The point is they had the control to do it, align and take the “easy” route, or decide to diverge and take some consequences- good or not so good.
    It’s a god analogy but Ireland was an economic colony of the U.K. until the EU came along and gave them other options.

    Are we heading toward economic vassaldom?
    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.
    Except we will be signing a trade agreement with the EU that will commit us to alignment with them in many ways, and breaking any one of them will cause the whole trade deal to collapse. There will be no gradual divergence because the EU will ensure that exercising that option is so unattractive.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    For the rail enthusiasts amongst us, a two-part series starts on Channel 5 at 20.00, about the North Yorkshire Moors railway.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    My take on May's speech. We are now seeing intimations of reality, if not the actual reality. These proposed solutions are still not realistic but we can see where the compromises will be made. Probably it was OK. Mrs May can't stand up and say, Brexit is waste of time, money and potential, we're stuck with this mess, so I am completely focused on damage limitation. Single Market and Customs Union , right now. The collapse would be total. She can't say it.

    Yet.

    You still think the UK will be in the Single Market after it is all wrapped up?
    All she agreed was some regulatory alignment.

    Still no single market, still no free movement, still no customs union
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488
    rcs1000 said:

    Ishmael_Z said:



    So you are going on assumptions, and not evidence. Never a good way to change the electoral process.

    The electoral process is a balance between sometimes-contradictory requirements. If you change one thing, you need to consider who that change will affect the other requirements. That's what I'm concerned has not been done.

    You may take the 'minimum necessary measures' to make personation more difficult, and prevent many registered voters from voting. That'd be worse for the electoral process in many ways. We need to get the balance right.

    On the contrary, the essence of crime prevention is to accept and act on certain general assumptions about human nature, and to do that in advance of any specific evidence. Going back to the front door example: say you are designing a house in a country where you have never previously lived and know next to nothing about. You put locks on the doors, on the assumption that burglary is a thing in this new country because it is everywhere else. If you wait for evidence on which to base your decision, you have failed, because the most likely and convincing evidence that people are going to burgle your house, is that people burgle your house. My contention is that arrangements to prevent personation can be as cheap and effective as putting locks on your doors. It isn't free, and it isn't unproblematic (because you lock yourself out 100 times for every one time you exclude a potential burglar, but worth it.
    Is your ratio 100?

    I.e., it's OK to disenfranchise 100 regular voters to prevent one fraudulent one?

    Because, really, this whole discussion should be about what the right ratio is.
    No, absolutely not. Losing ones own keys is a self-inflicted pain in the arse, not an injustice inflicted on anyone else. Common sense would dictate where you end up. Consider password strength: You make some stipulations about length and symbol sets, but you are guided by what is reasonable and workable. So you don't accept 123, but you also don't stipulate a truly random string of min 250 characters. I suppose that is all reducible to a formula, but what it is is common sense. Certainly nobody should be saying that it is better that a thousand impersonators vote, than one genuine voter is disenfranchised, nor the opposite.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488
    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
    To quote Mark Twain, 'history never repeats itself. Sometimes it rhymes.'

    It is to be hoped that our severing of formal ties with the EU does not lead to the break up of the UK, the mass outbreak of disease, foreign invasions and twelve centuries of warfare.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,957

    Corbyn's no longer authentic on Brexit and the public knows it.

    He looks completely out of his depth
    He has hardly had much to compete with on that score since the election though - most now take that view of May too!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
    To quote Mark Twain, 'history never repeats itself. Sometimes it rhymes.'

    It is to be hoped that our severing of formal ties with the EU does not lead to the break up of the UK, the mass outbreak of disease, foreign invasions and twelve centuries of warfare.
    How many centuries are you rooting for?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    edited March 2
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
    To quote Mark Twain, 'history never repeats itself. Sometimes it rhymes.'

    It is to be hoped that our severing of formal ties with the EU does not lead to the break up of the UK, the mass outbreak of disease, foreign invasions and twelve centuries of warfare.
    How many centuries are you rooting for?
    I was sort of hoping for none.

    Edit - if you're asking me to recommend a century, both the tenth and fifteenth centuries rock. They saw huge changes come in and the second one is more full of sex maniacs than a Peter Stringfellow party.

    If you want a good laugh, look up Sir Thomas Malory - writer of most of the Arthurian legends.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,267
    It's pretty clear that Remainer (in April 2016) May belongs to the Groucho Marx school of politics. 'Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.'

    Her position as PM and the Conservative Party in Government are what guides her.

    The GE last year was a dreadful mistake, but with a little finangling with Arlene Foster and the DUP....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
    To quote Mark Twain, 'history never repeats itself. Sometimes it rhymes.'

    It is to be hoped that our severing of formal ties with the EU does not lead to the break up of the UK, the mass outbreak of disease, foreign invasions and twelve centuries of warfare.
    How many centuries are you rooting for?
    I was sort of hoping for none.
    Wuss.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,019
    With the Italian election this weekend it may be affected by unemployment there having increased again.

    Overall only 59% of working age Italians are in employment compared with 79% in the UK.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    ydoethur said:

    We seem to want to exchange real sovereignty for market access and call it “Brexit”?

    To prove it's not only TSE who spouts Latin:

    'atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.'
    That in its original context is a Scot complaining about Italian immigrants, isn't it?
    I thought it was about a European superstate driving a lot of Spanish and East European soldiers around to fulfil some rackety master plan dreamed up by a drunken oaf a long way off who thought he was a god?

    Or am I confusing that with something else?
    I think both statements are corrct.
    To quote Mark Twain, 'history never repeats itself. Sometimes it rhymes.'

    It is to be hoped that our severing of formal ties with the EU does not lead to the break up of the UK, the mass outbreak of disease, foreign invasions and twelve centuries of warfare.
    How many centuries are you rooting for?
    I was sort of hoping for none.
    Wuss.
    Well you're the one who lives in the States. The way Trump is going I think we could add about 25% to that figure on warfare.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 434
    ydoethur said:

    On a serious note re Corbyn, there are a number of potential pitfalls. First, he is 69. If he doesn't become PM in the next 18 months he will be the oldest ever first time PM, on the back of zero experience and limited administrative ability. Hard to believe this would not become an issue.

    Second, while he is admirably clever at being all things to all men, that lasts until he has to make decisions. Can he really put them off for four years?

    Third, his team still look like a bunch of inept lightweights who with the possible exceptions of Starmer and Macdonnell would have been considered over-promoted as a sub-postmaster in Dyffryn Ardudwy. While there is talent on the Labour benches at the moment, either they are not willing to serve or he is not willing to use them. This leads to about a gaffe a week.

    However, that said, no party since 1865 has improved its position at an election after losing seats previously without a spell in opposition. May herself will be in her mid-60s and is already looking rather stale. So a Conservative landslide is clearly very unlikely unless something dramatic comes out. Considering that Corbyn has survived lying about his links with the IRA and Iran and his deputy taking half a million from a fascist propagandist, it's hard to see what that could be.

    Up until recently, all the Corbyn back history stuff has been random, with no strategy behind it.

    If Brandon Lewis is any good, he should be developing a long term planned take down of Corbyn, with revelations and the narrative lines already worked out.

    Milne and co have to date done a great job making it all sound irrelevant and ancient history, which is very clever given they present Corbyn as authentic as he's never changed his views.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815
    Soubry on any questions on R4 - is she going to act in the national interest or stick a big fat SDP fly in the ointment and continue her tantrum ?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    Not yet - but one day we will.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,822
    TGOHF said:

    Soubry on any questions on R4 - is she going to act in the national interest or stick a big fat SDP fly in the ointment and continue her tantrum ?

    This is the special Leaver definition of "national interest" which means "agreeing with me".
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 204
    edited March 2
    Italy - polls close 10pm GMT Sunday

    Evening all, for anyone interested here are the links for Italy, but please don't ask me to explain the new voting system :(

    http://www.interno.gov.it/it/speciali/2018-elections

    http://www.raiplay.it/dirette/rainews24?channel=RaiNews

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_general_election,_2018

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_general_election,_2018#New_electoral_system

    Sadly Italy has the latest poll closing time anywhere I think, but I'll be trying to watch some of the results and coverage - votes will be counted first for the Senate and then the Chamber of Deputies.

    Sunday also sees the result of the SPD membership ballot on whether to renew the coalition with the CDU/CSU.

    Finally, the next two elections will be the rather more predictable Russia Presidential (Sun 25 March) and Hungary (Sun 8 April).

    Thanks and best to all,

    DC
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,412

    With the Italian election this weekend it may be affected by unemployment there having increased again.

    Overall only 59% of working age Italians are in employment compared with 79% in the UK.

    This is a very interesting resource: data on labour participation rates (and changes) for all the countries in the world: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZS?end=2017&start=2000

    (This is 15+, so it will have (a) absolutely lower levels, and (b) a downward bias due to ageing societies.)

    What's remarkable is how small the changes have been in the past 18 years:
                    2000    2017
    Canada 65 65
    Australia 63 65
    UK 61 62
    USA 66 62
    Japan 63 60
    Germany 58 60
    Spain 53 58
    Italy 48 49
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,020
    TGOHF said:

    May landslide in 2022. Remember this post.

    I will. Very clever.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490
    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    The collapse of Catholicism would have appalled De Valera. The whole point of independence, from his point of view, was to create a pure Roman Catholic country.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!



  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463
    Sean_F said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    The collapse of Catholicism would have appalled De Valera. The whole point of independence, from his point of view, was to create a pure Roman Catholic country.
    But his successors disagreed. That’s the point.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    Snow is coming down really hard now. Tomorrow is going to be grim. My door was already hard work to open with the drifts against it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,020

    Italy - polls close 10pm GMT Sunday

    Evening all, for anyone interested here are the links for Italy, but please don't ask me to explain the new voting system :(

    Well now, you cannot tease like that. Not even a little tease on the voting system?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,019
    rcs1000 said:

    With the Italian election this weekend it may be affected by unemployment there having increased again.

    Overall only 59% of working age Italians are in employment compared with 79% in the UK.

    This is a very interesting resource: data on labour participation rates (and changes) for all the countries in the world: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZS?end=2017&start=2000

    (This is 15+, so it will have (a) absolutely lower levels, and (b) a downward bias due to ageing societies.)

    What's remarkable is how small the changes have been in the past 18 years:
                    2000    2017
    Canada 65 65
    Australia 63 65
    UK 61 62
    USA 66 62
    Japan 63 60
    Germany 58 60
    Spain 53 58
    Italy 48 49
    If you add in the under 15s then the overall Italian employment level would be below 40%.

    Makes you wonder what all the 'spare' people do.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,436
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    Absolutely!

    Not only that but its an absurd example to use when it is now already possible to get from the UK to Australia non-stop in under 16 hours. It used to take over 4 days and 7 stops which shows how much progress has been made.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    They would almost certainly tell you that whales aren't marked on modern maps.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 204
    kle4 said:

    Italy - polls close 10pm GMT Sunday

    Evening all, for anyone interested here are the links for Italy, but please don't ask me to explain the new voting system :(

    Well now, you cannot tease like that. Not even a little tease on the voting system?
    Haha - well both the Senate and Chamber seem to be 37% FPTP and 63% PR. And it seems that "panachage" is not allowed - ie you can't vote for one party in FPTP and a different one in the PR section.

    So if it was the UK, I think your FPTP vote for say UKIP would also be a PR vote for UKIP, and vice versa. But you couldn't say vote Con FPTP and then UKIP PR.

    So in that respect it's different from eg Germany/Scotland/Wales.

    Italy is always complex to follow :(

    Hope that helps!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,267

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    Absolutely!

    Not only that but its an absurd example to use when it is now already possible to get from the UK to Australia non-stop in under 16 hours. It used to take over 4 days and 7 stops which shows how much progress has been made.
    7 weeks when I were a lad. Friend of mine had a 'home posting' during his National Service. Turned out it was part of the RAMC team on a troopship plying between Southampton and Singapore. 6 weeks out, a week in port and 6 back.
    Did SFA for his family life.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.
    Proving that the EU is a better model for integration between nations than the UK.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.
    Proving that the EU is a better model for integration between nations than the UK.
    I have literally no idea how you draw that conclusion, and I’m not going to bother wasting my time trying.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,020

    kle4 said:

    Italy - polls close 10pm GMT Sunday

    Evening all, for anyone interested here are the links for Italy, but please don't ask me to explain the new voting system :(

    Well now, you cannot tease like that. Not even a little tease on the voting system?
    Haha - well both the Senate and Chamber seem to be 37% FPTP and 63% PR. And it seems that "panachage" is not allowed - ie you can't vote for one party in FPTP and a different one in the PR section.

    So if it was the UK, I think your FPTP vote for say UKIP would also be a PR vote for UKIP, and vice versa. But you couldn't say vote Con FPTP and then UKIP PR.

    So in that respect it's different from eg Germany/Scotland/Wales.

    Italy is always complex to follow :(

    Hope that helps!
    Grazie
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    The is an illusion created by a common language in my view.

    Think of it this way: Do you think someone from Portugal has more in common with a Spaniard or a Brazilian? I think most people would say a Spaniard. Why do you think the answer is different for us?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.


    Although I don't think she's Californian.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.
    Proving that the EU is a better model for integration between nations than the UK.
    I have literally no idea how you draw that conclusion, and I’m not going to bother wasting my time trying.
    Because in the EU Varadkar has clout, but in the UK you think he'd be an "obscure minister in a coalition government".
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    The is an illusion created by a common language in my view.

    Think of it this way: Do you think someone from Portugal has more in common with a Spaniard or a Brazilian? I think most people would say a Spaniard. Why do you think the answer is different for us?
    I’m not Brazilian or Portuguese so I haven’t the faintest. I know how I feel. And I feel massively more at home in Melbourne than I do in Marseille- and I speak French and have lived there.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,097
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    The is an illusion created by a common language in my view.

    Think of it this way: Do you think someone from Portugal has more in common with a Spaniard or a Brazilian? I think most people would say a Spaniard. Why do you think the answer is different for us?
    I’m not Brazilian or Portuguese so I haven’t the faintest. I know how I feel. And I feel massively more at home in Melbourne than I do in Marseille- and I speak French and have lived there.
    How at home do you feel in Finsbury?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463
    edited March 2

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    The is an illusion created by a common language in my view.

    Think of it this way: Do you think someone from Portugal has more in common with a Spaniard or a Brazilian? I think most people would say a Spaniard. Why do you think the answer is different for us?
    I’m not Brazilian or Portuguese so I haven’t the faintest. I know how I feel. And I feel massively more at home in Melbourne than I do in Marseille- and I speak French and have lived there.
    How at home do you feel in Finsbury?
    Krappy Rubsnif is fine. Bit down at heel economically but I have no issue with it on the way to the Arsenal.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    If that's a test of anything, the answer is: a lot more than there are Britons who could identify all of let's say Latvia, Slovenia and Malta. Where does that leave us?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,463

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.
    Proving that the EU is a better model for integration between nations than the UK.
    I have literally no idea how you draw that conclusion, and I’m not going to bother wasting my time trying.
    Because in the EU Varadkar has clout, but in the UK you think he'd be an "obscure minister in a coalition government".
    Once Brexit is done, Varadkar is going to have the clout of the Slovak PM or the Finns. Two fifths of sod all.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,645
    ydoethur said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.


    Although I don't think she's Californian.
    Sounds more of a Southern Belle, but quite a sweetie albeit not a smartie!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675
    justin124 said:

    Corbyn's no longer authentic on Brexit and the public knows it.

    He looks completely out of his depth
    He has hardly had much to compete with on that score since the election though - most now take that view of May too!
    Today's speech in complexity and depth is far removed from anything Corbyn could dream of doing.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,314
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    https://youtu.be/0AloO2aj

    Although I don't think she's Californian.
    Sounds more of a Southern Belle, but quite a sweetie albeit not a smartie!
    I'd guess Alabama or Georgia, but I am hardly an expert on US accents.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,645
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!
    I wonder how many Californians could tell you where Wales is on a map...
    The point is I can tell them in nuance if they dont know, because my cultural Venn diagram overlaps theirs far more than it does a Bulgarian, or a Finn (heresy for you?). In reality in my experience most Californians without guidance struggle to point out European countries. Or even Europe on a map.
    https://youtu.be/0AloO2aj

    Although I don't think she's Californian.
    Sounds more of a Southern Belle, but quite a sweetie albeit not a smartie!
    I'd guess Alabama or Georgia, but I am hardly an expert on US accents.
    Sounds more Delta Louisiana to me, but possibly along Florida panhandle. It doesn't sound a hill country accent.
  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 621

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:


    @JonathanD

    “Events dear boy events”.

    To use my Irish analogy, though I’m sure Collins and De Valera from about 1920 wouldn’t be happy about the 26/6 split continuing a century on, the developments and position of the 26 would probably amaze them, in a positive way. At least politically and economically ( no idea how the relative fall of Catholicism would play - but that’s a sideshow to this).

    The point is they (the Irish) gained the power to act when they could, if they wanted. It might take us 40/50 years to unwind matters fully. If we want. The point is it will be our choice.

    Ireland gained sovereignty when it became independent, and gained power when it pooled that sovereignty.
    If they weren’t independent in the first place with 4.7 million in a U.K. of about 70 million they’d have as much clout as London south of the river, and Varadkar would be an obscure minister in a coalition government.
    Proving that the EU is a better model for integration between nations than the UK.
    I have literally no idea how you draw that conclusion, and I’m not going to bother wasting my time trying.
    Because in the EU Varadkar has clout, but in the UK you think he'd be an "obscure minister in a coalition government".
    David Cameron did not have any clout so why would Varadkar. He's useful to the EU at the moment but when Brexit's done he'll be a PM of just another little member state.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,675
    welshowl said:

    welshowl said:

    Who knows? The point is we’ll have more choice and opportunity (and the motive?). But I suspect as the rest of the world becomes ever more dominant in world affairs and distance continues to shrink (not much in the way of shipping costs for say a TV format service export), we will gradually diversify more away from Europe. The English language alone will nudge us there quite a bit.

    If we could get to Australia in two hours on an Easyjet for a hundred quid, you'd have a point, but we can't.
    What a bag of bollocks.

    I have today been simultaneously in text conversations with California and Australia without leaving my sofa. In a few weeks I will immensely enjoy the IPL live from India. The language unifies all of that across time zones instantly now, even before Elon Musk or whoever can get us to the Barrier Reef for a quick winter break in a couple of hours in the future.

    And non of that stops me going to France next week!



    My eldest son runs an international logistics company from his home in Vancouver with virtual daily interaction with his US, New Zealand, Australia, China and far east offices.
This discussion has been closed.