Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Despite an overwhelming majority of voters thinking Brexit is

2456

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Scott_P said:

    ydoethur said:

    I am bewildered that Grieve, who is a very able lawyer and vastly experienced Parliamentarian doesn't grasp this simple fact.

    It's not a simple fact.

    We can withdraw Article 50.

    (Yes, I know, that's not a fact. It's an untested legal hypothesis, but it's more factual than "German car makers will beg us for a deal")
    The application to have a remit to the CJE was dismissed in the Court of Session this week. It will remain an untested legal hypothesis.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    ydoethur said:

    1942 looks like the turning of the tide now (because it was), and to some extent it could be foreseen then, given the vast potential power of the enlarged Allies - but at the time, no-one knew whether Alamein and Stalingrad (and Midway) were critical turning points or just a blip on the trend that had seen the Axis sweep all before it since 1937.

    After all, for all the Allied potential, had the Soviet Union collapsed politically, socially or economically - and that was certainly possible - the future for the Western Allies would have looked extremely bleak with 100+ German divisions freed up to attack into the Middle East, India or Britain directly, and unlimited raw materials supplied to Germany for next to nothing with which to do so. Sure, in the end, the atom bomb would have been decisive, even if Britain had to ask for terms, but no-one - not even Roosevelt or Churchill - knew that in 1942.

    I think you

    Embarrassing though the loss of Singapore was for the British, it wasn't fatal. Australia was the more important prize and the Japanese were never strong enough to attack it. By summer 1943 things looked distinctly better.

    If you'll tell me that Brexit is now at its Singapore phase and will soon move on to Alamein, I'll be delighted, but colour me sceptical.
    I'm not sure I agree about the USSR. Yes, there were no illusions in the Kremlin about what suing for peace would mean but that had been true (more or less) for the tsar too: it hadn't stopped Imperial Russian troops from stopping fighting. It is remarkable that the Soviet troops did carry on to the degree that they did (and there is a limit on what you can do through compulsion, when people think they're going to die anyway). I don't think it's unfeasible to imagine that a bottom-up mutiny might have snowballed through the ranks.

    I agree re Singapore. All the same, it was a disastrous loss.
    Singapore has repercussions to this day. It basically killed off Britain’s leading role in the Far East, and we were an afterthought forever after.
    It was the point in time when Australia realised that only the Americans were able to defend them militarily. Particularly when Churchill wanted to keep the Australian Army in Egypt, rather than return for home defence, while the USA commited its vital carriers to protect Australia in the Battle of the Coral Sea.

    To a large extent, Australia's pivot away from Britain started then, before an EEC application was conceived. Britain joining the EEC was a consequence of our declining power, not its cause.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    OK, leaders only sign something after a couple of hours if (one or more of):

    - It doesn't really say anything important;
    - One side is dictating terms;
    - One side isn't paying attention;
    - It was all agreed beforehand

    Guesses?

    The meeting was all about symbolism, so your point 1 applies, and up to a point so does point 4. But that doesn't make it a waste of time. If there's one thing we know about Trump, it's that he's driven by personal instinct. He seems to have satisfied himself that Kim is on the level, and Kim can reasonably hope that he will impulsively order some concessions on sanctions. We've just seen at the G8 that Trump doesn't go along with vague agreements unless he essentially likes the people he's dealing with.
    We must have faith at such moments, one day Corbyn will shake his own MPs hands.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Jonathan said:

    We must have faith at such moments, one day Corbyn will shake his own MPs hands.

    https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1006430571223048192
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    F1: hmm. Vettel is 2.25 for the title. Given the next three tracks are power-focused and he was utterly dominant in Canada, that might be worth backing now, perhaps with a view to hedge in a month's time. Just a thought.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Mr L,

    "Thankfully they were led by an idiot."

    As a non-historian, I always thought Hitler was less of an idiot than a fool who over-estimated his own abilities as a General.

    Stalin started off the same way, but when his army started collapsing around him, he stood back and let Zhukov et al take over, despite being jealous of them. A despot but one with self-awareness and thus more dangerous.

    Hitler seemed to believe that his experience as a corporal in WW1 made him a strategist. A bit like playing 'football manager' and offering to manage the England team. Complete stupidity … playing football manager only equips you for the Scotland team.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082

    CD13 said:

    All democratic votes seem flawed in some ways when you lose. The other side had more air-time, more media attention and the right arguments weren't publicised. Most people are used to that but accept that's democracy. I've seldom seen the party I vote for win a GE.

    Despite all the media meltdown, that remains true for the UK. The EU referendum was a binary decision, and a few of the Remainers regard themselves as unusually prescient and superior to the hoi polloi. The other lot were inherently inferior, hence the outraged reaction.

    They are the wise ones and this shouldn't happen. They're even surprised that most people accept the decision.

    You accurately describe the mindset of the illiberal, fascist wing of the Remainers.

    But, the truly remarkable thing is that these people simultaneously assert that they are the sole enlightened liberals in the country.
    This morning two national newspapers threaten MPs by reference to their own preferred interpretation of what the referendum vote meant. There are illiberal fascists in 2018 and they ain’t Remainers.
    I particularly like the Loch Ness Monster on this one. Presumably picures of unicorns were not available:

    https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1006294392032956416?s=19
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    edited June 2018
    ydoethur said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Scott_P said:
    This is less terrible than the Lords amendment, but still an unconstitutional power grab by Parliament from the executive. If the Tory rebels are so worried about no deal, then they should have the courage to vote no confidence in their own government.
    I've no objection to Parliament voting on it, although it is a dramatic break with tradition. What doesn't seem to have occurred to these people is it's not 'this deal or remain,' it's 'this deal or no deal.' We can't unilaterally impose terms on the EU, no matter how many votes there are in Parliament. If we could I'd have voted out without a second thought and my preferred terms would have included putting all drunks who connive at tax evasion on trial. As I thought the EU would seek to punish us causing massive economic damage, I voted remain. So far, nothing has happened to make me think my prediction was wrong.

    I am bewildered that Grieve, who is a very able lawyer and vastly experienced Parliamentarian doesn't grasp this simple fact. Adonis, who is a stupider and more ignorant version of Michael Gove, it's less surprising.
    That principle applies even more so to the referendum itself. It didn't stop the vote. In fact, there is a probability of the EU allowing reversion to the status quo, while there was no chance of the deal implied by the Leave campaign ever happening.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2018



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,726
    Scott_P said:

    accept the result

    I fully accept the result.

    I don't accept it is in the National interest, and it never will be
    Like!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Scott_P said:
    So they have the votes. This lot are not the, "let's go down with the ship still fighting," type.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    CD13 said:

    All democratic votes seem flawed in some ways when you lose. The other side had more air-time, more media attention and the right arguments weren't publicised. Most people are used to that but accept that's democracy. I've seldom seen the party I vote for win a GE.

    Despite all the media meltdown, that remains true for the UK. The EU referendum was a binary decision, and a few of the Remainers regard themselves as unusually prescient and superior to the hoi polloi. The other lot were inherently inferior, hence the outraged reaction.

    They are the wise ones and this shouldn't happen. They're even surprised that most people accept the decision.

    You accurately describe the mindset of the illiberal, fascist wing of the Remainers.

    But, the truly remarkable thing is that these people simultaneously assert that they are the sole enlightened liberals in the country.
    This morning two national newspapers threaten MPs by reference to their own preferred interpretation of what the referendum vote meant. There are illiberal fascists in 2018 and they ain’t Remainers.
    I see on both sides of the debate "no surrender" is very much a la mode.

    bowler hats all round
    But that’s not true. There is a large chunk of the population that recognises that Brexit is a bad idea but that it is going to happen anyway, see the polling above. The only question is how much damage is going to be done in the process.
    the issue isn't the bulk of the population - who have accepted the result- the issue is the remoaners who cant accept the result and the brexiteers a l'outrance who want to leave no matter what.

    PB has its unfair share of both and the country would be better served by all putting the national interest first rather than what they wanted yesterday.
    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.
    Hmmm

    Id say 50% are happy to go, 30% are going with the flow and the hard core of remainers is 20%

    the problem being the 20% cant accept the collective 2 fingers from the lower orders on their stewardship of the country
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    He also nerver mentions the current employment figures. Two years ago he was telling us the Brexit vote would lead to immediate mass unemployment as investment drained out of the UK.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,726



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    An epitome of the problem. I’ts Roundheads vs Cavaliers all over again. Or York vs Lancaster.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780
    Charles said:

    She had to write an essay for Hitler for her history class.

    Your mother made money doing Hitler's history essays for him???

    Imagine how different the world would have turned out if she'd done a less good job.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,591
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Nigelb said:

    felix said:

    Ouch - CNN in sour grapes shocker.
    Hardly. In the absence of a substantive document, some skepticism is entirely justified. It’s not as though the US has not previously had agreements with North Korea.

    How "substantive" do you expect this kind of communique to be? Peninsula to be denuclearised by next Wednesday and free owls in perpetuity for everybody?
    About as substantive as it actually was - i.e. not very.

    There is little to distinguish it from previous US agreements with the NK regime - other than that the two leaders have publicly tied themselves to the process (recall Trump's threat to walk out after five minutes).

    As I have said below, I'm pretty pleased with it, as at a minimum it dramatically reduces the likelihood of a US pre-emptive strike which would have had disastrous consequences. I'll be pleasantly astonished if it actually leads to full nuclear disarmament (CVID).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    F1: hmm. Vettel is 2.25 for the title. Given the next three tracks are power-focused and he was utterly dominant in Canada, that might be worth backing now, perhaps with a view to hedge in a month's time. Just a thought.

    It’s pretty much 50/50 between Vettel and Hamilton for the title, there being only a single point between them a third of the way through. It could be decided on grid penalties towards the end of the season sadly. I’ve been backing whoever is longer after each race.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    currystar said:

    He also nerver mentions the current employment figures. Two years ago he was telling us the Brexit vote would lead to immediate mass unemployment as investment drained out of the UK.

    LOL

    Did you actually read the headline?

    Hundreds of engineering jobs will be lost in the West Midlands after Jaguar Land Rover announced that it was switching production of the Land Rover Discovery to Slovakia.

    Which words are confusing you?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    I suspect that Jaguar Land Rover is simply being sensible: they know that - on a five year view - that things will have been sorted out, and therefore being able to invest at a below market price in the UK makes sense (i.e. basing electric car production here). On the other hand, there might be significant near term disruption, and therefore moving cash cows abroad is the way to go.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    CD13 said:

    Mr L,

    "Thankfully they were led by an idiot."

    As a non-historian, I always thought Hitler was less of an idiot than a fool who over-estimated his own abilities as a General.

    Stalin started off the same way, but when his army started collapsing around him, he stood back and let Zhukov et al take over, despite being jealous of them. A despot but one with self-awareness and thus more dangerous.

    Hitler seemed to believe that his experience as a corporal in WW1 made him a strategist. A bit like playing 'football manager' and offering to manage the England team. Complete stupidity … playing football manager only equips you for the Scotland team.

    Would that be like the Scotland cricket team? All that skill and experience on the England side, "Come on Wood and Plunkett, keep bowling short so the ball sits up to be hit. What's the worst that could happen?"
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,591
    DavidL said:

    CD13 said:

    I was on holiday last week and my telly viewing was restricted to CNN for news. Wow! They don't like Trump, do they? Is it a personal thing?

    Yesterday morning the Today program had their traditional balance of views at 8.50. One of the contributors, Anne McElvoy, thought that Brexit was a "strategic mistake". The other, for balance, thought it was a complete disaster. CNN should be congratulated on their moderation.
    CNN love Trump - he's done wonders for their ratings/profits.
    He's not too fond of them.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit

    And here is the quote from JLR

    Top JLR boss Andy Goss told Sky News that its investment in a car plant in Slovakia should now be seen as a "hedge" against uncertainty around the post-Brexit trading environment.

    "It's become a hedge by default - we will assess everything in the cold light of day - we don't expect to do it, but if we have to we will,"
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,591
    1. The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.

    2. The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

    3. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

    4. The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.


    'Complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula' necessarily involves US forces as well, of course.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. P, not au fait with the car industry, but this suggests the news may be good:
    https://twitter.com/MarcherLord1/status/1006182186331115520

    Mr. Sandpit, Hamilton's benefited far more than Vettel from good fortune. The German, on performance, deserves to be about 30 points ahead. Hamilton was also lacklustre, again, at Canada. I thought it'd take a while for that 14 point lead to be whittled down but it was overturned in one race. (For that matter, Bottas was horrendously unlucky in Baku. He really should be a contender right now).

    The reliability advantage will help Hamilton, but that shouldn't come into play during the next few races.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    CD13 said:

    I was on holiday last week and my telly viewing was restricted to CNN for news. Wow! They don't like Trump, do they? Is it a personal thing?

    Yesterday morning the Today program had their traditional balance of views at 8.50. One of the contributors, Anne McElvoy, thought that Brexit was a "strategic mistake". The other, for balance, thought it was a complete disaster. CNN should be congratulated on their moderation.
    CNN love Trump - he's done wonders for their ratings/profits.
    He's not too fond of them.
    Sure, it's the same approach that favoured Fox when Obama was in power.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    DD now mansplaining backstop on R4.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    Scott_P said:
    Its a shame some of the more loudmouth MPs dont call byelections a la DD or Zak on the issue of who governs,,,,,could throw up some interesting answers
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.

    There was a discussion last night about the UK importing $8bn a year in cars to the USA. The most interesting related stat would be what is the average price of those cars, does anyone have the data? I’d guess well over $100k per car. We don’t export a lot of Nissans and Toyotas to the US, rather a lot of Rolls Royces, McLarens, Aston Martins, Bentleys and Range Rovers. Maybe a few MINIs might drag down the average a little though.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    Scott_P said:

    currystar said:

    He also nerver mentions the current employment figures. Two years ago he was telling us the Brexit vote would lead to immediate mass unemployment as investment drained out of the UK.

    LOL

    Did you actually read the headline?

    Hundreds of engineering jobs will be lost in the West Midlands after Jaguar Land Rover announced that it was switching production of the Land Rover Discovery to Slovakia.

    Which words are confusing you?
    So are we suffering mass unemployment in the last 2 years?
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    But Slovakia is in the Single European Market though..............
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Just as an aside, North Korea still has concentration camps.

    Was pleased ITV News' coverage last night did raise the fact it's not a lovely place, and its leader is not a lovely man.

    That's not to say there shouldn't be dialogue, but even if North Korea actually denuclearises, the tyranny its people suffers is no small thing.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.

    Hugo Rifkind in The Times today

    this is the nub of Donald Trump’s Russia problem. Why, Donald, did Vladimir Putin want you to win? What was in it for him?

    All of a sudden, though, Brexiteers have the Russia problem, too.

    we no longer need to grub around with bots and conjecture to believe that Russia was pro-Brexit. The proof was in Mr Banks’s pudding. Which I bet he ate.

    Ultimately, the whole ongoing bind of the British government over Brexit can be summarised as the quest to find a way to Make Britain Great Again, while doing exactly what it is that regimes which most dislike the thought of British greatness wanted us to do the most. Some days, I genuinely wonder if it’s only the useful idiots who still think a Brexit that doesn’t hurt Britain is even possible. And they’re idiots.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-are-split-between-nihilism-and-denialism-0vslvccrb
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Mr L,

    "Would that be like the Scotland cricket team?"

    Had Stalin been in charge of the England cricket team, he'd have shot the captain. And so would Hitler.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    We certainly live in interesting times .... Mrs JackW will not be attending Royal Ascot next week !!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Scott_P said:

    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit

    And here is the quote from JLR

    Top JLR boss Andy Goss told Sky News that its investment in a car plant in Slovakia should now be seen as a "hedge" against uncertainty around the post-Brexit trading environment.

    "It's become a hedge by default - we will assess everything in the cold light of day - we don't expect to do it, but if we have to we will,"
    errr what ?

    you think car companies don't do this as a matter of course ? That's why they globalise. Car companies are great at playing governments off against each other as a way of getting subsidies.

    I shall be amused when at some point JLR are forced to row back on their plans for Slovakia as all the people I know say the labour market is extremely tight and they cant get skilled people.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    No Nobel prize for Trump just yet then?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    I remember studying Barbarossa at School. It was stunningly successful but based on faulty intelligence. Within the first month the Germans had completely destroyed more divisions than they thought the Russians had. And the better equipped forces were just coming west from Siberia.

    Because of the faulty intelligence the Germans were not adequately prepared for a winter campaign. Because Hitler had stupidly not focussed on the middle east there were shortages of oil. Because of the Battle of Britain there was insufficient air support. But their military was formidable. Thankfully they were led by an idiot.

    The Nazis were militarily successful rather than formidable. The innovative tactic of dive-bombing just ahead and in coordination with the army meant they swept aside the low countries in days, and France in not much longer. But that tactic could not be brought to bear against Britain, because of the Channel. The RAF was more than a match for the Luftwaffe, which incidentally had no heavy bombers, even by the end of the war.

    The Kriegsmarine consisted of some U-boats, which by the middle of the war were merely a nuisance, and a handful of capital ships that turned out to be almost unusable, with almost nothing in between. In summer 1940, the Kriegsmarine's operational strength was 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers. The Royal Navy's Home Fleet included one aircraft carrier, five capital ships, 11 cruisers and 80 destroyers. More than enough to see off some invasion barges in the Channel. Not to mention the Mediterranean Fleet's two aircraft carriers, seven capital ships, seven cruisers and 30 destroyers.

    This is what Churchill had in mind when he continued after the fight them on the beaches peroration, that the Empire would have continued, armed and guarded by the British Fleet.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Just as an aside, North Korea still has concentration camps.

    Was pleased ITV News' coverage last night did raise the fact it's not a lovely place, and its leader is not a lovely man.

    That's not to say there shouldn't be dialogue, but even if North Korea actually denuclearises, the tyranny its people suffers is no small thing.

    A friend , a seasoned traveller, visited North Korea - he found it terrifying and heartbreaking.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    CD13 said:

    Mr L,

    "Would that be like the Scotland cricket team?"

    Had Stalin been in charge of the England cricket team, he'd have shot the captain. And so would Hitler.

    So not all bad then?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Jonathan said:

    OK, leaders only sign something after a couple of hours if (one or more of):

    - It doesn't really say anything important;
    - One side is dictating terms;
    - One side isn't paying attention;
    - It was all agreed beforehand

    Guesses?

    The meeting was all about symbolism, so your point 1 applies, and up to a point so does point 4. But that doesn't make it a waste of time. If there's one thing we know about Trump, it's that he's driven by personal instinct. He seems to have satisfied himself that Kim is on the level, and Kim can reasonably hope that he will impulsively order some concessions on sanctions. We've just seen at the G8 that Trump doesn't go along with vague agreements unless he essentially likes the people he's dealing with.
    We must have faith at such moments, one day Corbyn will shake his own MPs hands.
    Lol.

    Leaders have it so rough right now.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.

    There was a discussion last night about the UK importing $8bn a year in cars to the USA. The most interesting related stat would be what is the average price of those cars, does anyone have the data? I’d guess well over $100k per car. We don’t export a lot of Nissans and Toyotas to the US, rather a lot of Rolls Royces, McLarens, Aston Martins, Bentleys and Range Rovers. Maybe a few MINIs might drag down the average a little though.
    The Honda Civics made in Swindon are exported to the US and Japan as the main markets.
    Civics made in Turkey are sold in continental EU.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
    Remain lost the vote because of xenophobic lies. The country is now blighted for many years as a result. Leavers have yet to work through the implications of the manner of their victory. Until they do, Britain is in a downward spiral.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435

    DavidL said:

    I remember studying Barbarossa at School. It was stunningly successful but based on faulty intelligence. Within the first month the Germans had completely destroyed more divisions than they thought the Russians had. And the better equipped forces were just coming west from Siberia.

    Because of the faulty intelligence the Germans were not adequately prepared for a winter campaign. Because Hitler had stupidly not focussed on the middle east there were shortages of oil. Because of the Battle of Britain there was insufficient air support. But their military was formidable. Thankfully they were led by an idiot.

    The Nazis were militarily successful rather than formidable. The innovative tactic of dive-bombing just ahead and in coordination with the army meant they swept aside the low countries in days, and France in not much longer. But that tactic could not be brought to bear against Britain, because of the Channel. The RAF was more than a match for the Luftwaffe, which incidentally had no heavy bombers, even by the end of the war.

    The Kriegsmarine consisted of some U-boats, which by the middle of the war were merely a nuisance, and a handful of capital ships that turned out to be almost unusable, with almost nothing in between. In summer 1940, the Kriegsmarine's operational strength was 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers. The Royal Navy's Home Fleet included one aircraft carrier, five capital ships, 11 cruisers and 80 destroyers. More than enough to see off some invasion barges in the Channel. Not to mention the Mediterranean Fleet's two aircraft carriers, seven capital ships, seven cruisers and 30 destroyers.

    This is what Churchill had in mind when he continued after the fight them on the beaches peroration, that the Empire would have continued, armed and guarded by the British Fleet.
    not off Singapore it wouldnt.......
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    But Slovakia is in the Single European Market though..............
    your point being ?

    models tend to get produced on the same production line in the same country. Car companies then ship them around the world. Or are you claiming JLR will never sell a Discovery in the UK again ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    OK, leaders only sign something after a couple of hours if (one or more of):

    - It doesn't really say anything important;
    - One side is dictating terms;
    - One side isn't paying attention;
    - It was all agreed beforehand

    Guesses?

    The meeting was all about symbolism, so your point 1 applies, and up to a point so does point 4. But that doesn't make it a waste of time. If there's one thing we know about Trump, it's that he's driven by personal instinct. He seems to have satisfied himself that Kim is on the level, and Kim can reasonably hope that he will impulsively order some concessions on sanctions. We've just seen at the G8 that Trump doesn't go along with vague agreements unless he essentially likes the people he's dealing with.
    We must have faith at such moments, one day Corbyn will shake his own MPs hands.
    Lol.

    Leaders have it so rough right now.
    True, I mean how many Labour MPs would you want to shake hands with?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Jonathan, brave of him to go there. I wouldn't.

    We shouldn't lose sight of that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    You mean like Trump has to grapple with the fact Hillary won the popular vote? Do you think Corbyn would grapple with the fact the Tories got 42% of the vote if May loses the EU votes this week and he ends up PM? Of course not. In a democracy whoever has the most votes or can couple together a majority of seats wins.

    Leave won and they thus have a mandate for Brexit to be implemented, the fact they won 52% rather than 62% may give more of a moral case for the government to consider Remainers but that is not absolute given Remain still losr
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
    Remain lost the vote because of xenophobic lies. The country is now blighted for many years as a result. Leavers have yet to work through the implications of the manner of their victory. Until they do, Britain is in a downward spiral.
    well here we go again

    you keep pushing this shtick but youre not convincing anyone

    remain lost because

    1. People wanted immigration controls
    2. Leaves lies were better than Remains lies
    3. Remain ran a shit campaign
    4. A general malaise with the establishment

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.

    There was a discussion last night about the UK importing $8bn a year in cars to the USA. The most interesting related stat would be what is the average price of those cars, does anyone have the data? I’d guess well over $100k per car. We don’t export a lot of Nissans and Toyotas to the US, rather a lot of Rolls Royces, McLarens, Aston Martins, Bentleys and Range Rovers. Maybe a few MINIs might drag down the average a little though.
    The Honda Civics made in Swindon are exported to the US and Japan as the main markets.
    Civics made in Turkey are sold in continental EU.
    Interesting, thanks. There are also a couple of North American plants producing Civics though, but the US market for them will be massive - maybe drags my average down a little!
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,756
    JackW said:

    At the risk of getting hired as a columnist for the Daily Express, World War 2 was going badly for the British in 1942, but that doesn't mean they didn't want to keep trying.

    "Hired as a columnist for the Daily Express" - Oh the shame, the ignominy, the expense account .... Hhmmmm ....
    Apart from anything else it would mean being employed by the Mirror Group.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780

    DavidL said:

    I remember studying Barbarossa at School. It was stunningly successful but based on faulty intelligence. Within the first month the Germans had completely destroyed more divisions than they thought the Russians had. And the better equipped forces were just coming west from Siberia.

    Because of the faulty intelligence the Germans were not adequately prepared for a winter campaign. Because Hitler had stupidly not focussed on the middle east there were shortages of oil. Because of the Battle of Britain there was insufficient air support. But their military was formidable. Thankfully they were led by an idiot.

    The Nazis were militarily successful rather than formidable. The innovative tactic of dive-bombing just ahead and in coordination with the army meant they swept aside the low countries in days, and France in not much longer. But that tactic could not be brought to bear against Britain, because of the Channel. The RAF was more than a match for the Luftwaffe, which incidentally had no heavy bombers, even by the end of the war.

    The Kriegsmarine consisted of some U-boats, which by the middle of the war were merely a nuisance, and a handful of capital ships that turned out to be almost unusable, with almost nothing in between. In summer 1940, the Kriegsmarine's operational strength was 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers. The Royal Navy's Home Fleet included one aircraft carrier, five capital ships, 11 cruisers and 80 destroyers. More than enough to see off some invasion barges in the Channel. Not to mention the Mediterranean Fleet's two aircraft carriers, seven capital ships, seven cruisers and 30 destroyers.

    This is what Churchill had in mind when he continued after the fight them on the beaches peroration, that the Empire would have continued, armed and guarded by the British Fleet.
    not off Singapore it wouldnt.......
    And what happened off Singapore showed how useful capital ships were without air superiority. Sending the home fleet to intercept the barges would have been a suicide run. We would have done it of course. Whether any of the ships would have made the barges is another question.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    It's possible the JLR decision to move production out of the UK will ultimately benefit the UK. Electric vehicles are the prize in manufacturing terms. The here and now is that they are moving the production out and are only intending to develop the other production later. It's hard not to see this as derisking. Brexit doesn't do car manufacturing any good. The question is how much bad it will do.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2018



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    I posted two days ago that the country was split 50:50 ( I gave you an extra 2 per cent)!

    This is what I wrote:

    "There is no good deal (either for Remainers or Leavers).

    The country is split pretty much 50:50.

    With those numbers, we can’t stay in the EU and make it work for us. And we can’t leave and make it work for us.

    May has a shitty hand, but the cards in the hand remain the same whoever is holding them, and whether they want to take us out or keep us in."

    As regards Russia, I am not a Russophobe, I am not a xenophobe. I have many academic friends from Russia in this country and in the US who have suffered harassment from the Russian-haters.

    If you don't like Trump, don't blame Russia -- blame the American people, who voted for Trump.

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    It is no different from blaming foreigners. It is no different from xenophobia.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.

    There was a discussion last night about the UK importing $8bn a year in cars to the USA. The most interesting related stat would be what is the average price of those cars, does anyone have the data? I’d guess well over $100k per car. We don’t export a lot of Nissans and Toyotas to the US, rather a lot of Rolls Royces, McLarens, Aston Martins, Bentleys and Range Rovers. Maybe a few MINIs might drag down the average a little though.
    The Honda Civics made in Swindon are exported to the US and Japan as the main markets.
    Civics made in Turkey are sold in continental EU.
    ah yes, but don't forget remainers have read an article by a journalist in London who doesn't even own a car.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,756
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Nigelb said:

    felix said:

    Ouch - CNN in sour grapes shocker.
    Hardly. In the absence of a substantive document, some skepticism is entirely justified. It’s not as though the US has not previously had agreements with North Korea.

    How "substantive" do you expect this kind of communique to be? Peninsula to be denuclearised by next Wednesday and free owls in perpetuity for everybody?
    An aspiration to have the peninsula denuclearised by date X, or even year X, would be nice. However I'm not holding my breath.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    ydoethur said:

    I'm not sure I agree about the USSR. Yes, there were no illusions in the Kremlin about what suing for peace would mean but that had been true (more or less) for the tsar too: it hadn't stopped Imperial Russian troops from stopping fighting. It is remarkable that the Soviet troops did carry on to the degree that they did (and there is a limit on what you can do through compulsion, when people think they're going to die anyway). I don't think it's unfeasible to imagine that a bottom-up mutiny might have snowballed through the ranks.

    I agree re Singapore. All the same, it was a disastrous loss.

    Not sure what your point about the Tsar is, as they never tried to sue for peace and that was why Nicholas' armies collapsed. Are you thinking of the Kadets being forced off the Provisional Government after Milyukov declared the war would go on?

    With regard to the Soviet troops, Nazi atrocities against Slavs were enormously helpful in that regard. As I have said, initially many Soviet citizens were very pleased to see them, especially in those areas the Soviets had conquered and held by force - the Ukraine and the Baltic states. That didn't last. The irony of course is that under Order no. 227 the NKVD were themselves responsible for a vast number of deaths among Soviet soldiers.

    What I meant was that the USSR was too big to be overcome as long as it kept fighting. When you look at his tactics with a cold eye, all Hitler's successes were due to the surrender of confused and demoralised opponents who found the Germans were unexpectedly quick and aggressive. That succeeded in France by the push through Ardennes, and failed in Britain where the natural defences were more formidable and the leader of the government point blank refused to even consider settlement. In Russia, the tactics nearly captured Moscow, but once that had failed there was no real hope of overcoming the Soviets.

    One statistic to chew in. Behind the Volga there were 300 km of defensive emplacements. That's as long as the M1. Imagine trying to fight through that if there was any resistance. Can't be done quickly. And as long as there was no sudden collapse, the sheer size of the USSR was always bound to tell sooner rather than later, especially when coupled to the US and UK.
    It would be quicker to say “never fight a land war in Asia”
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    It's possible the JLR decision to move production out of the UK will ultimately benefit the UK. Electric vehicles are the prize in manufacturing terms. The here and now is that they are moving the production out and are only intending to develop the other production later. It's hard not to see this as derisking. Brexit doesn't do car manufacturing any good. The question is how much bad it will do.
    Brexit could be the best thing to happen to the industry, it depends how HMG handles the situation. For a start off all the supply chain threats simply mean we need more on shoring of supplier production. We could also do with a VM being enticed to start up van production.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm not sure I agree about the USSR. Yes, there were no illusions in the Kremlin about what suing for peace would mean but that had been true (more or less) for the tsar too: it hadn't stopped Imperial Russian troops from stopping fighting. It is remarkable that the Soviet troops did carry on to the degree that they did (and there is a limit on what you can do through compulsion, when people think they're going to die anyway). I don't think it's unfeasible to imagine that a bottom-up mutiny might have snowballed through the ranks.

    I agree re Singapore. All the same, it was a disastrous loss.

    Not sure what your point about the Tsar is, as they never tried to sue for peace and that was why Nicholas' armies collapsed. Are you thinking of the Kadets being forced off the Provisional Government after Milyukov declared the war would go on?

    With regard to the Soviet troops, Nazi atrocities against Slavs were enormously helpful in that regard. As I have said, initially many Soviet citizens were very pleased to see them, especially in those areas the Soviets had conquered and held by force - the Ukraine and the Baltic states. That didn't last. The irony of course is that under Order no. 227 the NKVD were themselves responsible for a vast number of deaths among Soviet soldiers.

    What I meant was that the USSR was too big to be overcome as long as it kept fighting. When you look at his tactics with a cold eye, all Hitler's successes were due to the surrender of confused and demoralised opponents who found the Germans were unexpectedly quick and aggressive. That succeeded in France by the push through Ardennes, and failed in Britain where the natural defences were more formidable and the leader of the government point blank refused to even consider settlement. In Russia, the tactics nearly captured Moscow, but once that had failed there was no real hope of overcoming the Soviets.

    One statistic to chew in. Behind the Volga there were 300 km of defensive emplacements. That's as long as the M1. Imagine trying to fight through that if there was any resistance. Can't be done quickly. And as long as there was no sudden collapse, the sheer size of the USSR was always bound to tell sooner rather than later, especially when coupled to the US and UK.
    It would be quicker to say “never fight a land war in Asia”
    Anyone who has played Risk knows that.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340


    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.

    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
    Remain lost the vote because of xenophobic lies. The country is now blighted for many years as a result. Leavers have yet to work through the implications of the manner of their victory. Until they do, Britain is in a downward spiral.
    well here we go again

    you keep pushing this shtick but youre not convincing anyone

    remain lost because

    1. People wanted immigration controls
    2. Leaves lies were better than Remains lies
    3. Remain ran a shit campaign
    4. A general malaise with the establishment

    I don’t see anything in what you say that is inconsistent with what I wrote. The difference is that what you wrote is entirely backward-looking and is entirely empty of moral content.

    You chuckle and chortle at Remainers and their moral take on the result. And then you complain that they don’t just forget about the past and pull together to make the best of Brexit. Today we see two national newspapers using fascist tropes about the will of the people and betrayal to bully MPs into adopting their highly contentious view of what the vote requires. This all flows directly from the strategy of Leave campaigners to use xenophobic lies to secure their aim.

    Until Leavers appreciate that the manner of their victory has blighted public discourse for a generation, no progress can be made on rebuilding it.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Remain is what Obama very publicly wanted as he intervened in the referendum.

    What did he want and why ?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Trump is not what Russia wanted. Trump is what Putin wanted.

    You have smeared a people.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,756
    edited June 2018

    DavidL said:

    I remember studying Barbarossa at School. It was stunningly successful but based on faulty intelligence. Within the first month the Germans had completely destroyed more divisions than they thought the Russians had. And the better equipped forces were just coming west from Siberia.

    Because of the faulty intelligence the Germans were not adequately prepared for a winter campaign. Because Hitler had stupidly not focussed on the middle east there were shortages of oil. Because of the Battle of Britain there was insufficient air support. But their military was formidable. Thankfully they were led by an idiot.

    The Nazis were militarily successful rather than formidable. The innovative tactic of dive-bombing just ahead and in coordination with the army meant they swept aside the low countries in days, and France in not much longer. But that tactic could not be brought to bear against Britain, because of the Channel. The RAF was more than a match for the Luftwaffe, which incidentally had no heavy bombers, even by the end of the war.

    The Kriegsmarine consisted of some U-boats, which by the middle of the war were merely a nuisance, and a handful of capital ships that turned out to be almost unusable, with almost nothing in between. In summer 1940, the Kriegsmarine's operational strength was 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers. The Royal Navy's Home Fleet included one aircraft carrier, five capital ships, 11 cruisers and 80 destroyers. More than enough to see off some invasion barges in the Channel. Not to mention the Mediterranean Fleet's two aircraft carriers, seven capital ships, seven cruisers and 30 destroyers.

    This is what Churchill had in mind when he continued after the fight them on the beaches peroration, that the Empire would have continued, armed and guarded by the British Fleet.
    The Luftwaffe had the He177 towards the end of the war which had a comparable bomb load to the Lancaster. Of course by that time a strategic heavy bomber was the last thing Germany needed.

    I'd imagine with dozens of land based airfields near to the Channel, aircraft carriers would be a liability in any hypothetical invasion scenario.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    What did he want and why ?

    Ongoing peace and prosperity for millions of people.

    But we voted against that...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.
    average a little though.
    The Honda Civics made in Swindon are exported to the US and Japan as the main markets.
    Civics made in Turkey are sold in continental EU.

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    people in the car industry have known that for years, this has bugger all to do with Brexit. They announced the decision before we even had the Brexit vote.

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e9f9b44-3ffc-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e
    Correct, they are concentrating the high tech, high value add jobs in the UK plant, thus increasing productivity.

    There was a discussion last night about the UK importing $8bn a year in cars to the USA. The most interesting related stat would be what is the average price of those cars, does anyone have the data? I’d guess well over $100k per car. We don’t export a lot of Nissans and Toyotas to the US, rather a lot of Rolls Royces, McLarens, Aston Martins, Bentleys and Range Rovers. Maybe a few MINIs might drag down the average a little though.
    The Honda Civics made in Swindon are exported to the US and Japan as the main markets.
    Civics made in Turkey are sold in continental EU.
    Neither Japan or the US have a preferential trade agreement with the EU, so it doesn't matter where those cars are made, they will be subject to import taxes. Going forward, Japan will probably sign a PTA with the EU so there's an incentive to move manufacturing to the EU for those cars. Even if the UK signs a similar PTA its cars will likely fail the local content thresholds for tax free import.

    This is apart from the much bigger costs implications of exporting cars from the UK to the EU.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Trump is not what Russia wanted. Trump is what Putin wanted.

    You have smeared a people.

    Putin is what Russia wants. He won an election, right?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Trump is not what Russia wanted. Trump is what Putin wanted.

    You have smeared a people.
    According to a Pew poll, Russians and Israelis were the only nationalities surveyed who had more confidence in Trump than Obama in managing world affairs

    http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340



    As regards Russia, I am not a Russophobe, I am not a xenophobe. I have many academic friends from Russia in this country and in the US who have suffered harassment from the Russian-haters.

    If you don't like Trump, don't blame Russia -- blame the American people, who voted for Trump.

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    It is no different from blaming foreigners. It is no different from xenophobia.

    You completely misunderstand my views on Russia. It was obvious well before the referendum that Russia was campaigning heavily for a Leave vote. I do not regard anything in the news recently as doing more than joining the dots. I don't like what it does but as Stan Laurel said, you can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead.

    What makes Russia interesting is the wilful refusal by any Leavers to address why Russia wanted Brexit so badly, to see that their actions have encouraged one of the most disruptive and dangerous states in the world to become still more disruptive and dangerous and to acknowledge that they have enabled that.

    You could have heard a pin drop on here among Leavers when the subject came up again at the weekend.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Trump) realise. This sort of trade has NOTHING to do with the principle of comparative advantage. It makes no sense economically to develop technology (eg car manufacture) - then give it to a country that has not developed it simply because their labour is cheaper (not more efficient, cheaper) than yours, and then re-import the finished goods back to the UK to sell to consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    It's possible the JLR decision to move production out of the UK will ultimately benefit the UK. Electric vehicles are the prize in manufacturing terms. The here and now is that they are moving the production out and are only intending to develop the other production later. It's hard not to see this as derisking. Brexit doesn't do car manufacturing any good. The question is how much bad it will do.
    Brexit could be the best thing to happen to the industry, it depends how HMG handles the situation. For a start off all the supply chain threats simply mean we need more on shoring of supplier production. We could also do with a VM being enticed to start up van production.
    An interesting discussion is what is Ford going to do. Very large sales in the UK, too much production of medium and low value cars in Germany and the Engine plants in the UK.
    If there was one company that was going to restart production in the UK this would be my bet. Depends on the costs of closing a German plant, last one Opel did cost 122K euros per employee, now PSA's problem low value cars made with very expensive costs (what could possibly go wrong)
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559


    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.

    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Rew Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
    Remain lost the vote becau in a downward spiral.
    well here we go again

    you keep pushing this shtick but youre not convincing anyone

    remain lost because

    1. People wanted immigration controls
    2. Leaves lies were better than Remains lies
    3. Remain ran a shit campaign
    4. A general malaise with the establishment

    I don’t see anything in what you say that is inconsistent with what I wrote. The difference is that what you wrote is entirely backward-looking and is entirely empty of moral content.

    You chuckle and chortle at Remainers and their moral take on the result. And then you complain that they don’t just forget about the past and pull together to make the best of Brexit. Today we see two national newspapers using fascist tropes about the will of the people and betrayal to bully MPs into adopting their highly contentious view of what the vote requires. This all flows directly from the strategy of Leave campaigners to use xenophobic lies to secure their aim.

    Until Leavers appreciate that the manner of their victory has blighted public discourse for a generation, no progress can be made on rebuilding it.
    when the lawyer is basing his argument on morality you know its not a strong one.

    maybe the morality bit you missed was voters seeing their pockets empty while the managerial classes stuffed theirs and then filled their boots. Or seeing their representaives care more for their own interests than those of their electors

    It's a view of morality but from the other side
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    DavidL said:

    I remember studying Barbarossa at School. It was stunningly successful but based on faulty intelligence. Within the first month the Germans had completely destroyed more divisions than they thought the Russians had. And the better equipped forces were just coming west from Siberia.

    Because of the faulty intelligence the Germans were not adequately prepared for a winter campaign. Because Hitler had stupidly not focussed on the middle east there were shortages of oil. Because of the Battle of Britain there was insufficient air support. But their military was formidable. Thankfully they were led by an idiot.

    The Nazis were militarily successful rather than formidable. The innovative tactic of dive-bombing just ahead and in coordination with the army meant they swept aside the low countries in days, and France in not much longer. But that tactic could not be brought to bear against Britain, because of the Channel. The RAF was more than a match for the Luftwaffe, which incidentally had no heavy bombers, even by the end of the war.

    The Kriegsmarine consisted of some U-boats, which by the middle of the war were merely a nuisance, and a handful of capital ships that turned out to be almost unusable, with almost nothing in between. In summer 1940, the Kriegsmarine's operational strength was 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers. The Royal Navy's Home Fleet included one aircraft carrier, five capital ships, 11 cruisers and 80 destroyers. More than enough to see off some invasion barges in the Channel. Not to mention the Mediterranean Fleet's two aircraft carriers, seven capital ships, seven cruisers and 30 destroyers.

    This is what Churchill had in mind when he continued after the fight them on the beaches peroration, that the Empire would have continued, armed and guarded by the British Fleet.
    The Luftwaffe had the He177 towards the end of the war which had a comparable bomb load to the Lancaster. Of course by that time a strategic heavy bomber was the last thing Germany needed.

    I'd imagine with dozens of land based airfields near to the Channel, aircraft carriers would be a liability in any hypothetical invasion scenario.
    Yes and that is why they were kept away from Dunkirk but that is not really the point, which was the huge difference in scale between the British and German navies -- and this is before the Americans entered the war. Although we can all recite the names of the Bismarck, Scharnhorst and so on, the Kriegsmarine was simply too small.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    tlg86 said:

    Euroscepticism predates Putin.

    Completely misses the point. Again.

    Why did Putin's Russia encourage Brexit?

    What's in it for them, and why did so many prominent Brexiteers seem happy to help?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    She had to write an essay for Hitler for her history class.

    Your mother made money doing Hitler's history essays for him???

    Imagine how different the world would have turned out if she'd done a less good job.
    Monetisation is a core skill in my family...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,981
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
    Would you be so blasé about Putin interfering in a UK general election to help Corbyn?

    After all socialism in the UK predates Putin.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2018



    As regards Russia, I am not a Russophobe, I am not a xenophobe. I have many academic friends from Russia in this country and in the US who have suffered harassment from the Russian-haters.

    If you don't like Trump, don't blame Russia -- blame the American people, who voted for Trump.

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    It is no different from blaming foreigners. It is no different from xenophobia.

    You completely misunderstand my views on Russia. It was obvious well before the referendum that Russia was campaigning heavily for a Leave vote. I do not regard anything in the news recently as doing more than joining the dots. I don't like what it does but as Stan Laurel said, you can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead.

    What makes Russia interesting is the wilful refusal by any Leavers to address why Russia wanted Brexit so badly, to see that their actions have encouraged one of the most disruptive and dangerous states in the world to become still more disruptive and dangerous and to acknowledge that they have enabled that.

    You could have heard a pin drop on here among Leavers when the subject came up again at the weekend.
    You repeatedly use Russia when you mean Putin.

    There is a growing and hysterical anti-Russian climate in the US amongst the illiberal fascists who like to blame others. My Russian academic friends are experiencing it daily. You are helping to create this climate of xenophobia here.

    If you regret the Brexit decision, there are many people to blame.

    Somewhere, way, way, way down the list is the unpleasant Vladimir Putin. But, I think you could probably start much, much closer to home.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Scott_P said:

    What did he want and why ?

    Ongoing peace and prosperity for millions of people.

    But we voted against that...
    I guess what with all those wars and no rise in wages it made sense to try something different
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950



    It depends what you mean by accepted. Roughly a third of the population are putting on their Union Jack cufflinks and polishing their jackboots in anticipation of the great day of liberation. Roughly a third are going with the flow whatever their private feelings. And roughly a third are watching events with the same mounting sense of horror that you get when watching a multi-car pile-up on the other carriageway that you’re helpless to prevent.

    Ludicrous.

    Remainers need to grapple with the fact that the social class AB was the only class to vote remain.

    Once they have understood that, and understood why, then they might comprehend a little more about the country they live in.

    Clearly, some Remainers ("a third of the population are putting on Union Jack cufflinks") live in a remote & fantastical world.
    Leavers need to grapple with the fact that 48% voted to Remain and at present at best Leave is level pegging on whether it’s a good idea.

    Once they have understood that they might comprehend a little more about the country they are living in.

    PS Kudos to you for being the only Leaver to grapple with the awkward story that Russia was far more deeply involved with Leave.EU than had previously been made public. I have to say I wasn’t expecting the defence “I for one welcome our new Kremlin overlords”, but it’s a view I suppose.
    chortle

    remain lost the vote because they didn't understand their own country
    Leave won because they knew there were unsavoury elements in their own country and they pandered to them.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
    Would you be so blasé about Putin interfering in a UK general election to help Corbyn?

    After all socialism in the UK predates Putin.
    Yes, I am blasé about Russia helping Corbyn.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    I heard a business woman from Northern Ireland on the radio saying that she voted for Brexit but her business is starting to suffer badly.

    Did you anticipate the border problems? 'No I didn't. We didn't really think about it'

    Would you now consider moving out of the country if things continue as they are? 'Yes I would. But It's a large family business so it would involve a lot of people who are all close'

    Do you now regret voting Brexit? 'No. Not really'.

    There's an Irish joke in there somewhere......
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,726
    Just seen a Facebook post which suggests that with a ‘Hard Brexit’ supplies of gin could be at risk.
    Apparently juniper berries are imported from Mediterranean countries.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,981
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
    Would you be so blasé about Putin interfering in a UK general election to help Corbyn?

    After all socialism in the UK predates Putin.
    Yes, I am blasé about Russia helping Corbyn.
    Because it is already happening.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/russia-tried-to-swing-the-uk-election-for-corbyn-investigation-claims-2018-4
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
    Would you be so blasé about Putin interfering in a UK general election to help Corbyn?

    After all socialism in the UK predates Putin.
    Yes, I am blasé about Russia helping Corbyn.
    Because it is already happening.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/russia-tried-to-swing-the-uk-election-for-corbyn-investigation-claims-2018-4
    I'm sure that that's what made all the difference. Not the shocking Tory campaign, or the fact that for 20 years Labour and the Tories have told people they can have something for nothing and they didn't like being told that they can't.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited June 2018
    Surely a Brexit joke by a Remainer that the Sun haven't picked up on....

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6505679/collection-of-eight-stamps-issued-for-50th-anniversary-of-dads-army/

    Edit. Sorry Scott. Missed your post
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1006430906045870080

    This is great news, apparently. So say the Brexiteers...

    It probably confirms what Brexiteers (and Tro consumers.

    This is the flaw of the EU. It is a corporatist construction, not one based on genuine free market competition.
    the Slovakia decision has nothing to do with Brexit but is simply part of JLR's long term plan to globalise production in key markets. They already have production in China and will start up plants in India and North America.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29702342/jaguar-land-rover-1bn-chinese-factory-begins-production

    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/lr-build-next-defender-india

    www.carsuk.net/jaguar-land-rover-planning-us-production/
    It's possible the JLR decision to move production out of the UK will ultimately benefit the UK. Electric vehicles are the prize in manufacturing terms. The here and now is that they are moving the production out and are only intending to develop the other production later. It's hard not to see this as derisking. Brexit doesn't do car manufacturing any good. The question is how much bad it will do.
    Brexit could be the best thing to happen to the industry, it depends how HMG handles the situation. For a start off all the supply chain threats simply mean we need more on shoring of supplier production. We could also do with a VM being enticed to start up van production.
    An interesting discussion is what is Ford going to do. Very large sales in the UK, too much production of medium and low value cars in Germany and the Engine plants in the UK.
    If there was one company that was going to restart production in the UK this would be my bet. Depends on the costs of closing a German plant, last one Opel did cost 122K euros per employee, now PSA's problem low value cars made with very expensive costs (what could possibly go wrong)
    Ford have done an excellent job of crapping on the UK. Mostly it must be said with a UK CEO at the helm of Ford Europe. On the other hand it hasn't worked out well for them, their UK market share has roughly halved in the last 30 years. I suspect they will have to close one of their UK engine plants as the battery switch begins to bite. Whether they will introduce new product lines to the empty factory remains to be seen
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340



    As regards Russia, I am not a Russophobe, I am not a xenophobe. I have many academic friends from Russia in this country and in the US who have suffered harassment from the Russian-haters.

    If you don't like Trump, don't blame Russia -- blame the American people, who voted for Trump.

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    It is no different from blaming foreigners. It is no different from xenophobia.

    You completely misunderstand my views on Russia. It was obvious well before the referendum that Russia was campaigning heavily for a Leave vote. I do not regard anything in the news recently as doing more than joining the dots. I don't like what it does but as Stan Laurel said, you can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead.

    What makes Russia interesting is the wilful refusal by any Leavers to address why Russia wanted Brexit so badly, to see that their actions have encouraged one of the most disruptive and dangerous states in the world to become still more disruptive and dangerous and to acknowledge that they have enabled that.

    You could have heard a pin drop on here among Leavers when the subject came up again at the weekend.
    You repeatedly use Russia when you mean Putin.

    There is a growing and hysterical anti-Russian climate in the US amongst the illiberal fascists who like to blame others. My Russian academic friends are experiencing it daily. You are helping to create this climate of xenophobia here.

    If you regret the Brexit decision, there are many people to blame.

    Somewhere, way, way, way down the list is the unpleasant Vladimir Putin. But, I think you could probably start much, much closer to home.
    I repeatedly use Russia when I mean the Russian government. It's a normal usage in English.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_P said:

    If you don't like Brexit, don't blame Russia -- blame yourself (for failing to inspire the British population to vote Remain, for failing to share the benefits of the EU more widely).

    Blaming Russia is shorthand for not taking responsibility for your own actions, or your own country's actions.

    That almost completely misses the point. See the times article above.

    Trump is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    Brexit is what Russia wanted. The important question is why?

    If a foreign power wants something (bad) to happen in your country, it's not xenophobic to question the motives of those who share that view.
    Euroscepticism predates Putin.
    Would you be so blasé about Putin interfering in a UK general election to help Corbyn?

    After all socialism in the UK predates Putin.
    Yes, I am blasé about Russia helping Corbyn.
    Just as well, because apparently they did
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/28/russian-twitter-bots-attempted-influence-election-supporting/
    Brexit and Trump were surprises that Russia had a hand in. Corbyn's relatively good show in 2017 election was also a big surprise.
    Russia wants to destabilise us and there are enough useful idiots here to help.
This discussion has been closed.