I think Sweden might win tomorrow. In some ways their team is better than ours.
I think you are wrong but might I commend the 7/1 against Sweden reaching the final because if they are stronger than us, then they should also beat whoever wins from Croatia and Russia.
I think Sweden might win tomorrow. In some ways their team is better than ours.
I think you are wrong but might I commend the 7/1 against Sweden reaching the final because if they are stronger than us, then they should also beat whoever wins from Croatia and Russia.
If Russia win the tournament it'll be a testament to sheer will power over talent. They must be under enormous pressure to perform well in their own country.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
People who can afford private health insurance will be able to. Retirement to the continent will once again be the exclusive preserve of the well off British as it was until the EU.
Too many headbangers whispering voices Brexit on posters too many choices If when why what how much have you got Have you got it do you get it If so how often Which do you choose? The hard or soft option?
Voted Tory at last election if this is the best they've got I'll be voting to get Corbyn in so he can screw over Tories like they've screwed over my votes.
It feels like we don't have a government at the moment and that we haven't had one for a year or so. Nor an opposition though possibly only as a consequence of not having a government. Neither does it feel like we have many friends.
It would be reassuring to have friends but it's surprising how little it matters having a non functioning government.
It feels like we don't have a government at the moment and that we haven't had one for a year or so. Nor an opposition though possibly only as a consequence of not having a government. Neither does it feel like we have many friends.
It would be reassuring to have friends but it's surprising how little it matters having a non functioning government.
Things seem to be ticking along quite nicely without a government.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
No welfare, no free state healthcare and very difficult even to rent a property if you are a non Swiss national unless you get the prized residency permit.
The Swiss as you might say operate freedom of movement in name only. If you aren't doing a well paid job with a long term contract and aren't therefore a clear net contributor they can make life very difficult to get a residency permit. And you must buy private medical insurance.
Switzerland has the highest percentage of immigrants of any major European country. Half their World Cup first team were eligible to play for Kosova. It is like the much vaunted Australian points system, a place with higherper capita net migration than the UK. Such systems work because they actually let in a lot of people.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
People who can afford private health insurance will be able to. Retirement to the continent will once again be the exclusive preserve of the well off British as it was until the EU.
Yes, I suspect that life will remain much the same for those of us with a good financial cushion. If May can make the Deal stick, and not have it fall apart in contact with the EU team, then BRINO will be the best option. Still not as good as having a say in the rules, but to be fair EU rules are by and large vastly beneficial and well drafted.
I just heard a financial journalist talking about the complexities and misunderstandings of Brexit with regard to services particularly how the single market gave us control rather than taking it away. Her points were very eruditely put and reading this 12 point plan after hearing her is like reading one of those pop-up picture books of the bible for the under 5s
May won't be able to lock down dissent if the EU says no. She has basically been put in the position of telling the EU "take it or leave it - but if you leave it, there will be no deal on offer from my successor..."
Yes, she's definitely put the commission in a tough spot here, she's come across as very reasonable, facing down the ERG and uniting behind a single vision for Brexit while making it sound acceptable. There's a glaring hole in the shape of free movement, however, the commission knows that if they turn this down without any consideration or negotiation then May is gone and we really do move towards a no deal Brexit on their insistence.
Nonsense. May will win a confidence vote unless someone in the cabinet is trying to oust her, and they’ve just proven she has the measure of them.
No. This is the moment May and her allies forgot how weak they are. You see, pragmatic minded people believe there is a pragmatic compromise to this mess, they don’t actually understand the principles in play here. I am not just saying this, I have conclusive evidence: If this white paper comes into effect, 99% of the British will feel they ended up with change they are not satisfied with. Remember yes minister review of the papers early 80’s “daily telegraph readers believe this country is already ruled by another country”? The brexit press in 2016 and the whole leave vote based on the same sentiment. BINO does not settle that. In the ‘matter of principle’ lobby, Mogg, Benn, Foot, Field, but look what those in the pragmatism lobby have in common, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, May, each proud of the fact they climbed to the top of the greasy pole, but where exactly did they leave the country? In a better place?
Rejoice rejoice. The glorious 6th. When pragmatism ruled the day. Miss Pragmatism’s Finest Hour. But Principle? She died.
There never was any principle. The Leave campaign that narrowly won on the false promise that you can Brexit at no cost was based on a lie, not a principle.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Yup and Spain is now giving free healthcare to all foreign nationals regardless of status
F1: I was looking for something else, but happened to notice that Raikkonen has outqualified Vettel at Silverstone for the last three seasons (entire time they've been team mates).
He's 21 (23 with boost) to get pole. I think each way (third the odds, top 2) is worth a small sum. Tiny bit shorter for the race result on the same basis. Given Mercedes' reliability last time (though they've tried to account for it at least in part with a new part), that may be worth considering.
The 2.2 Mr B suggested on under 15.5 classified finishers is, I think, just about value.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
People who can afford private health insurance will be able to. Retirement to the continent will once again be the exclusive preserve of the well off British as it was until the EU.
Wrong - free healthcare for all foreign nationals in Spain.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Yup and Spain is now giving free healthcare to all foreign nationals regardless of status
I'm not sure how long they will be able to afford that. It's the kind of wheeze that works when there aren't many oldies but fails if there are millions.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Yup and Spain is now giving free healthcare to all foreign nationals regardless of status
I'm not sure how long they will be able to afford that. It's the kind of wheeze that works when there aren't many oldies but fails if there are millions.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Yup and Spain is now giving free healthcare to all foreign nationals regardless of status
I'm not sure how long they will be able to afford that. It's the kind of wheeze that works when there aren't many oldies but fails if there are millions.
It was happening anyway. This just regularises it.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Careful, you're starting to sound like a Brexiteer.
If Trump, on his visit next week, offers TMay a "zero tariff FTA", she needs to respond:
In keeping with our commitments to uphold international standards, the UK will maintain high regulatory standard for the environment, climate change, social and employment, and consumer protection – meaning we will not let standards fall below their current levels.
If you, Mr President, can commit the US to adhere to our standards on US exports to the UK, then you may have a deal. Come back when we've completed the deal with the EU.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
How is Switzerland doing these days?
Pretty well, but probably having to accept freeish movement from the EU.
How much freeish? I mean really, given their rules.
It's notable that the headlines for the supposed mobility framework only reference the ability to apply for study and work but not any apparent mechanism for the economically inactive (e.g. Retirees) to do exercise those rights.
So it looks like Brits will lose their right to retire in Spain or France - what we have tended to use it for - but EU nationals will be able to study and work here and probably be able to bring mum and gran over to live too under the extended family unification scheme we agreed to uphold before?
So Brits lose out in net terms again - as the bulk of the FOM our citizens have exercised is for retirement to sunnier climbs not work or study.
Brits will still be able to retire to Spain and France. My parents retired to Spain (Canary Islands) in the mid 1960s. You will need to get a 'Residencia' and show your passport on entry / exit, but it's no big deal.
Yup and Spain is now giving free healthcare to all foreign nationals regardless of status
I'm not sure how long they will be able to afford that. It's the kind of wheeze that works when there aren't many oldies but fails if there are millions.
They say they hope that the UK government will continue to pay for pensioners as they do now.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Careful, you're starting to sound like a Brexiteer.
Ha, ha!!
No, however we leave we’ll be worse off than if we had stayed, but as we are leaving best to do it in the least damaging way possible. Given how important services are to the UK economy there will be further concessions to come, so what we end up with will be pretty much like what we have now except we’ll have less say in framing what rules we have to abide by.
The TPP bit of the statement is interesting, despite being fanciful - to say the least. Trump pulled the US out of TPP negotiations, didn’t he?
Reading between the lines, the government has clearly realised that there are choices which cannot be avoided and that our future is more tied to Europe and Asia than to the US. If there were any rational members of Team Trump that might give them pause for thought.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Careful, you're starting to sound like a Brexiteer.
Ha, ha!!
No, however we leave we’ll be worse off than if we had stayed, but as we are leaving best to do it in the least damaging way possible. Given how important services are to the UK economy there will be further concessions to come, so what we end up with will be pretty much like what we have now except we’ll have less say in framing what rules we have to abide by.
I was referring to your suggestion that no deal is difficult for other national leaders. Given what’s gone before, I wouldn’t count on them pressuring their EU masters to agree to what May has proposed.
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Careful, you're starting to sound like a Brexiteer.
Ha, ha!!
No, however we leave we’ll be worse off than if we had stayed, but as we are leaving best to do it in the least damaging way possible. Given how important services are to the UK economy there will be further concessions to come, so what we end up with will be pretty much like what we have now except we’ll have less say in framing what rules we have to abide by.
I was referring to your suggestion that no deal is difficult for other national leaders. Given what’s gone before, I wouldn’t count on them pressuring their EU masters to agree to what May has proposed.
In the end, the Commission will do what it’s told. I would not underplay the importance of the humiliation and emasculation of the Cabinet Brexiteers. Symbolically, that is the EU’s equivalent of blue passports. These things matter.
There's my biggest Brexit worry, I thought there was a chance we would trash our standards for the USA's benefit. Although not completely out the woods yet.
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
It's not the chlorination that's the problem. It's the need for the chlorination.
There's my biggest Brexit worry, I thought there was a chance we would trash our standards for the USA's benefit. Although not completely out the woods yet.
Yep - probably the biggest and most significant part of what has happened is that a Tory government has decided to tie the UK’s future to Europe and trying to get closer to Asia; both of which mean we cannot move closer to the US.
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Flourine is in tab water in some areas. Not chlorine!
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
I am no expert, but I do not see why the EU27 will reject this out of hand. They have won and, importantly, the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Davis have lost. I would not underestimate how important that is to both the Commission and the member states. From here, a No Deal Brexit starts to become politically difficult for other national leaders, too.
Careful, you're starting to sound like a Brexiteer.
Ha, ha!!
No, however we leave we’ll be worse off than if we had stayed, but as we are leaving best to do it in the least damaging way possible. Given how important services are to the UK economy there will be further concessions to come, so what we end up with will be pretty much like what we have now except we’ll have less say in framing what rules we have to abide by.
I was referring to your suggestion that no deal is difficult for other national leaders. Given what’s gone before, I wouldn’t count on them pressuring their EU masters to agree to what May has proposed.
In the end, the Commission will do what it’s told. I would not underplay the importance of the humiliation and emasculation of the Cabinet Brexiteers. Symbolically, that is the EU’s equivalent of blue passports. These things matter.
Yes, May has finally understood the importance of agreeing informally with the EU first and then presenting it to the cabinet rather than the other way round.
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Flourine is in tab water in some areas. Not chlorine!
Chlorine is still in ours as it always has been. Why has it been stopped in yours?
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Too many headbangers whispering voices Brexit on posters too many choices If when why what how much have you got Have you got it do you get it If so how often Which do you choose? The hard or soft option?
You voted Leave, I went remain, Let's lose lots of money. I don't like pain, you wanted a ruck, Let's shore up the money
Oh, there's a firm of local taxis, Take a card, you can dial.them Oh, there's a lot of cab'net resignees Until you try to find them
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Why less than 10%?
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Flourine is in tab water in some areas. Not chlorine!
Mr. Observer, didn't chicken used to be chlorinated in the UK a few decades ago? Isn't there chlorine in tap water? Aren't some fruit/veg washed in chlorine (cabbage/lettuce, I think)?
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
It's not the chlorination that's the problem. It's the need for the chlorination.
Which seems to me like banning chlorination is the wrong move for the wrong idea. That's like saying in a move to tackle binge drinking you'll ban drunk people from getting into taxis.
The need for chlorination is to prevent disease in humans, especially the spread of salmonella and campylobacter. European chickens on the market for human consumption have a higher prevalence of both of these than chlorine-washed American chickens do.
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Why less than 10%?
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
FiveThirtyEight have us at 17% but I think their model badly underestimates Croatia (13%) - who I'd make marginal favourites should we both get to the semi-final - I fear for our midfield up against Modric and Rakitic. So swap those two around.
The other question is just how strong France/Belgium are - the FiveThirtyEight model offers fairly narrow differences in a straight match-up. It implies we'd win just over one in three games in the final - which isn't right if you think they're a cut above. France in particular have looked pretty unstoppable in the knockouts. So take your pick really about 10% to 17% seems about right, depending on how highly you rate the opposition (and it will obviously change if Russia beat Croatia).
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Why less than 10%?
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
FiveThirtyEight have us at 17% but I think their model badly underestimates Croatia (13%) - who I'd make marginal favourites should we both get to the semi-final - I fear for our midfield up against Modric and Rakitic. So swap those two around.
The other question is just how strong France/Belgium are - the FiveThirtyEight model offers fairly narrow differences in a straight match-up. It implies we'd win just over one in three games in the final - which isn't right if you think they're a cut above. France in particular have looked pretty unstoppable in the knockouts. So take your pick really about 10% to 17% seems about right, depending on how highly you rate the opposition (and it will obviously change if Russia beat Croatia).
I reckon England v Seden is 50/50, then whoever we get in the SF I'd expect to beat us - Russia because they're at home and everything is going their way, Croatia because they're better than us - so say, 40/60, then whether France or Belgium in the final I wouldn't put England's chances at better than 30/70. Which multiplies together equals 6%, I think. I may be being a little pessimistic against Sweden, but not overly, I don't think.
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Russia are the weakest team left in the tournament, but have home advantage and so cannot be altogether discounted. Still I'd expect them to lose to Croatia.
Should England then beat Sweden, I think the most likely final would be Belgium against Croatia with Belgium winning it. Basically, the four semi-finalists in order of strength would be Belgium, France, Croatia, England - but the margins between them are not great, and anyone of the four could conceivably win. If they reach the semi-finals today, I'd give England a one in six chance of being overall winners.
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this, better than for years. But lets not get overexcited just yet - I reckon its a chance of less than 10% just yet. England definitely a lay based on the odds that are out there. Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Why less than 10%?
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
FiveThirtyEight have us at 17% but I think their model badly underestimates Croatia (13%) - who I'd make marginal favourites should we both get to the semi-final - I fear for our midfield up against Modric and Rakitic. So swap those two around.
The other question is just how strong France/Belgium are - the FiveThirtyEight model offers fairly narrow differences in a straight match-up. It implies we'd win just over one in three games in the final - which isn't right if you think they're a cut above. France in particular have looked pretty unstoppable in the knockouts. So take your pick really about 10% to 17% seems about right, depending on how highly you rate the opposition (and it will obviously change if Russia beat Croatia).
I reckon England v Seden is 50/50, then whoever we get in the SF I'd expect to beat us - Russia because they're at home and everything is going their way, Croatia because they're better than us - so say, 40/60, then whether France or Belgium in the final I wouldn't put England's chances at better than 30/70. Which multiplies together equals 6%, I think. I may be being a little pessimistic against Sweden, but not overly, I don't think.
I'd say more 60/40 for England against Sweden. The difference is we've got the 'Mark of Kane'.
May won't be able to lock down dissent if the EU says no. She has basically been put in the position of telling the EU "take it or leave it - but if you leave it, there will be no deal on offer from my successor..."
EU may say, "Yes, but..." and around we go again.
Indeed. However, if they reject it out of hand then the commission will be blamed for no deal and it gives the government licence to get on with a hostile Brexit which includes tax cuts, deregulation and specific country deals (bribes) service industries.
That'll go down well.
If they reject this deal without any negotiation I don't see that the government has any other path. It is a very fair compromise the commission must take it seriously.
Leavers need to lose the capacity for self delusion. The EU will demand FOM, ECJ and money in return for this deal and May will agree. Who is going to stop her?
A deal which includes all four freedoms and ECJ jurisdiction just won't make it though parliament. I know you're on the extremes but this is a reasonable deal, if the EU ask for all four freedoms, then that's just a rejection.
If the choice is between that and WTO brexit then parliament will vote for BINO and you know it.
That is based on how good the teams are (taking everything into account like home adv), Belgium and France are more likely to win it all as they have less games though.
Edit: Although I am almost more worried about playing Russia in the semi's than Croatia, so maybe I'm not entirely sure myself...
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
"Yeah, but, some English player dived, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
It is not Roger who has been banging on about laying England this past fortnight.
England do have a chance of winning this
Why less than 10%?
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
FiveThirtyEight have us at 17% but I think their model badly underestimates Croatia (13%) -
I reckon England v Seden is 50/50, then whoever we get in the SF I'd expect to beat us - Russia because they're at home and everything is going their way, Croatia because they're better than us - so say, 40/60, then whether France or Belgium in the final I wouldn't put England's chances at better than 30/70. Which multiplies together equals 6%, I think. I may be being a little pessimistic against Sweden, but not overly, I don't think.
Yeah, I think a little more optimism against Sweden puts it at around 9-10% - which I think is justified. There's little doubt the Swedes will make it very difficult for us but have also sat back and largely eschewed possession - which kind of suits our style of patient passing combined with balls into the box either from the wing-backs or set-pieces. You can see how they frustrate us into defeat, either via an error leading to a goal or penalties - but not how they'll go out and 'win' the game - which I think makes us more 60/40 than 50/50. Providing of course, the team keep their heads and keep probing rather than panic.
To summarise. We get continued access to n the EU's market and regulatory system for traded goods. In exchange the EU takes over a large part of our services business. Does that sound like the basis of a deal?
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
To summarise. We get continued access to n the EU's market and regulatory system for traded goods. In exchange the EU takes over a large part of our services business. Does that sound like the basis of a deal?
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
Does Green not indicate, for example, the existence of a permanent establishment (or other fixed place of residence) in the European country? In which case almost all the employment could be retained here, but the service provided wholly in the European country.
To summarise. We get continued access to n the EU's market and regulatory system for traded goods. In exchange the EU takes over a large part of our services business. Does that sound like the basis of a deal?
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
Does Green not indicate, for example, the existence of a permanent establishment (or other fixed place of residence) in the European country? In which case almost all the employment could be retained here, but the service provided wholly in the European country.
I think it depends on how regulated the service is as to how much employment could be off shored. It would be something the EU would want to nail down of it does down this route.
To summarise. We get continued access to n the EU's market and regulatory system for traded goods. In exchange the EU takes over a large part of our services business. Does that sound like the basis of a deal?
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
Does Green not indicate, for example, the existence of a permanent establishment (or other fixed place of residence) in the European country? In which case almost all the employment could be retained here, but the service provided wholly in the European country.
I think it depends on how regulated the service is as to how much employment could be off shored. It would be something the EU would want to nail down of it does down this route.
2 men and a dog, perhaps not - at least not for things like FS.
But in those industries, they could move 250 people to Dublin (the sort of move they have already made or said they will), and have an unarguably "real" place of business in the EU.
Could Barnier still f*ck things up? A snub now will mean he's not interested in a deal, so we leave after all?
QTWTA is always "yes"
Indeed he could but this time I suspect he'll say a more qualified no and suggest re-mixing the fudge. If he stonewalls he risks putting the EU decisively in the wrong. Interesting that both the ardent Remainers and the Hard Brexiteers are now praying for a stonewall.
To summarise. We get continued access to n the EU's market and regulatory system for traded goods. In exchange the EU takes over a large part of our services business. Does that sound like the basis of a deal?
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Expert opinion is that the EU will turn down this proposal, but I wonder. The EU gets the win/win on traded goods where they already have a balance of trade advantage. They can help themselves to our lucrative services trade. Member states must be tempted surely?
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
Does Green not indicate, for example, the existence of a permanent establishment (or other fixed place of residence) in the European country? In which case almost all the employment could be retained here, but the service provided wholly in the European country.
I think it depends on how regulated the service is as to how much employment could be off shored. It would be something the EU would want to nail down of it does down this route.
2 men and a dog, perhaps not - at least not for things like FS.
But in those industries, they could move 250 people to Dublin (the sort of move they have already made or said they will), and have an unarguably "real" place of business in the EU.
In that case the EU won't be interested. The whole point of the deal is for the UK to get the necessary continuity and access to the EU market and regulatory system for goods in exchange for a chunk of our services business. This way the EU ensures our outcomes are clearly and permanently worse than membership, which is its real red line.
Could Barnier still f*ck things up? A snub now will mean he's not interested in a deal, so we leave after all?
QTWTA is always "yes"
Indeed he could but this time I suspect he'll say a more qualified no and suggest re-mixing the fudge. If he stonewalls he risks putting the EU decisively in the wrong. Interesting that both the ardent Remainers and the Hard Brexiteers are now praying for a stonewall.
Even Vince Cable was saying that the EU could get the blame if they are seen to sabotage the deal
if you'd asked me before the competition, I would have put England about 7th or 8th.
Germany Spain France Brazil Portugal Argentina England Croatia
That implies a QF exit - but of course, four of those teams were knocked out before this round, so that means maybe SF.
I would have put England below Belgium as well, but not had Croatia on my radar.
Modric and Rakitic, one of the best midfields in the competition, I'd only put Frances ahead of it, Pogba, Matuidi and Kante. I think Modric is probably the best CM around and as with Xavi and Spain/Barcelona having an incredible player there makes a big difference.
if you'd asked me before the competition, I would have put England about 7th or 8th.
Germany Spain France Brazil Portugal Argentina England Croatia
That implies a QF exit - but of course, four of those teams were knocked out before this round, so that means maybe SF.
I would have put England below Belgium as well, but not had Croatia on my radar.
Modric and Rakitic, one of the best midfields in the competition, I'd only put Frances ahead of it, Pogba, Matuidi and Kante. I think Modric is probably the best CM around and as with Xavi and Spain/Barcelona having an incredible player there makes a big difference.
Croatia would be my biggest payout, although I have laid off a little since I had at 36
Eh? After A50 we will have left the EU. So how is that ditching Brexit?
I thought he was saying we should ditch Brexit because May's proposed deal is worse than leaving. However we are leaving due to the ticking clock, so just reapply.
Comments
It would be reassuring to have friends but it's surprising how little it matters having a non functioning government.
Mr. D, talking about the UK or Germany?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSqZOEZ2fU8
Technically, we lose our Mode 1 trade (cross border supply - the blue bars in the chart), which become the much less valuable Mode 3 (commercial presence in territory - the green bars) or disappear. Less valuable because we lose the associated employment. That's why Mode 3 access is easy to negotiate and Mode 1 isn't.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/1015172751739555840
Are you suggesting Neymar's ridiculous tantrums should not attract any ridicule because he isn't British?
Fail to see the relevance of a video from five years ago.
He's 21 (23 with boost) to get pole. I think each way (third the odds, top 2) is worth a small sum. Tiny bit shorter for the race result on the same basis. Given Mercedes' reliability last time (though they've tried to account for it at least in part with a new part), that may be worth considering.
The 2.2 Mr B suggested on under 15.5 classified finishers is, I think, just about value.
Roger's facing up to the grim reality that England have a chance of winning this.
In keeping with our commitments to uphold international standards, the UK will maintain high regulatory standard for the environment, climate change, social and employment, and consumer protection – meaning we will not let standards fall below their current levels.
If you, Mr President, can commit the US to adhere to our standards on US exports to the UK, then you may have a deal. Come back when we've completed the deal with the EU.
No, however we leave we’ll be worse off than if we had stayed, but as we are leaving best to do it in the least damaging way possible. Given how important services are to the UK economy there will be further concessions to come, so what we end up with will be pretty much like what we have now except we’ll have less say in framing what rules we have to abide by.
Reading between the lines, the government has clearly realised that there are choices which cannot be avoided and that our future is more tied to Europe and Asia than to the US. If there were any rational members of Team Trump that might give them pause for thought.
Or/and no sackings!
https://twitter.com/nickmacpherson2/status/1015361078660870146?s=21
[Not convinced with the need for a trade deal with the US, but the chlorine line just seems weird to me].
Still, 1 i 10 chances do come off sometimes. Someone's got to win it. We can dream...
Let's lose lots of money.
I don't like pain, you wanted a ruck,
Let's shore up the money
Oh, there's a firm of local taxis,
Take a card, you can dial.them
Oh, there's a lot of cab'net resignees
Until you try to find them
You voted Leave......etc.
Even assuming all clubs were equal we would have a 12.5% chance from being a quarter finalist. Based on the clubs remaining we ought to be higher than that.
https://www.water.org.uk/consumers/water-and-health/faqs#chlorine
The need for chlorination is to prevent disease in humans, especially the spread of salmonella and campylobacter. European chickens on the market for human consumption have a higher prevalence of both of these than chlorine-washed American chickens do.
https://www.captiongenerator.com/1024722/Chequers-Brexit-Downfall-parody
The other question is just how strong France/Belgium are - the FiveThirtyEight model offers fairly narrow differences in a straight match-up. It implies we'd win just over one in three games in the final - which isn't right if you think they're a cut above. France in particular have looked pretty unstoppable in the knockouts. So take your pick really about 10% to 17% seems about right, depending on how highly you rate the opposition (and it will obviously change if Russia beat Croatia).
https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1015498630223028225
Should England then beat Sweden, I think the most likely final would be Belgium against Croatia with Belgium winning it. Basically, the four semi-finalists in order of strength would be Belgium, France, Croatia, England - but the margins between them are not great, and anyone of the four could conceivably win. If they reach the semi-finals today, I'd give England a one in six chance of being overall winners.
1)France
*gap*
2)Croatia
=Belgium
4)England
=Russia
6)Sweden
That is based on how good the teams are (taking everything into account like home adv), Belgium and France are more likely to win it all as they have less games though.
Edit: Although I am almost more worried about playing Russia in the semi's than Croatia, so maybe I'm not entirely sure myself...
It satisfies our need for continuity and for the outcome to be clearly and permanently worse for us than membership, which the EU requires.
Germany
Spain
France
Brazil
Portugal
Argentina
England
Croatia
That implies a QF exit - but of course, four of those teams were knocked out before this round, so that means maybe SF.
GBP/USD 1.3287 +0.0063 +0.48%
EUR/USD 1.1745 +0.0055 +0.47%
GBP/EUR 1.1310 +0.0003 +0.03%
EUR/GBP 0.8839 -0.0005 -0.06% 0.8839 -0.0005 -0.06%
But in those industries, they could move 250 people to Dublin (the sort of move they have already made or said they will), and have an unarguably "real" place of business in the EU.
Could get tasty.
https://twitter.com/georgetrefgarne/status/1015479535675035648?s=21
The Salty Tears of Brexiteers...