Mr. Mark, there'd be an argument to try and frame the debate in the most helpful way for position X.
However, the options are critical. If it's May's rubbish deal versus Remain, I maintain that Remain will win handily.
If it's Leave (with no deal) versus Remain, that'll be tighter.
May's only hope, after Westminster votes it down, is to ask: given you wanted Brexit, what type of Brexit do you want: No Deal or My Deal? Her Deal would handily win and she would get her way. Problem being she said yesterday she is not PM if there is a second Referendum. So it would rather require her successor to be sufficiently wedded to her deal to go around the country asking the voters if they would like a Theresa May "Shit sandwich? Or starving to death?"
She already tried framing it as her deal or no deal. It didn't work
We haven't had the vote yet. I would expect a very late night with beer and sandwiches on the night before with Ollie and Tezza and the DUP. And then for the DUP to troop through the Aye lobby.
Twitter has a great deal to answer for. Our (and international) representatives seem to see it as some sort of ephemeral telephone call and not an indelible record of their painting themselves into corners. There’s much to be said for thought and silence but I fear that bridge has long been crossed.
But I suspect Batten is the true colours of UKIP and Farage the exception.
True. He was pretty clear on this on R4 this morning. But Farage emboldened people like Batten with his posters during the EU campaign. So he might want to examine the beams in his own eyes first.
is Farage distancing himself from UKIP making him a future Tory????? Maybe he will get into Parliament after all, he just needs the right leadership to let him in (bit like Robinson into UKIP)
The other advantage you've left out of the deal, which many are forgetting in focussing purely on the economics, is that we are out of the political project and ever closer union.
Any form of Remain sees us tied in to that explicitly or implicitly. We will forever be able to choose the level of co-operation the UK has with a single EU armed force, single tax area, single currency, single national anthem, etc etc.
This is a precious freedom for many of us who voted Leave fearful of the end destination.
So, I wake up this morning to find that black is white, the lion is lying down with the lamb, and Brexit now means Remain.
I think what's happening here is that the Brexit Buccaneers are trying to avoid blame. Now that May has made it quite clear that No Deal isn't on the cards, the Brexiteers have to make the calculation "what will incur more blame for me, personally?"
Since it seems now pretty much universally accepted that May's deal will be significantly worse for the country than Remain, maybe it's not surprising the Buccaneers have made a damascene conversion to continuity remain.
Sure, there'll be a short term hit to their popularity amongst the gammon faced men, but in the medium-long term, they won't have to suffer being saddled with the never ending fallout from the botched brexit negotations and May's squalid little deal.
Expect more Brexit big names going Hard Remain soon. Boris can't be far behind.
Hardly any Leave voters make the logical connection that if the deal's worse than remaining it's because staying in the EU is better than leaving.
I'm changing my view somewhat. I'm beginning to think Brexit is actually unworkable, and not just full of contradictions and very crap.
It's certainly workable, if Brexiteers want it to work. The workable version is what Theresa May is proposing. Of course in economic terms is not as good as remaining in the EU with Cameron't renegotiation package would have been, but we all knew that Brexit was going to be a net economic disbenefit, so that's not news. Against the economic disadvantages, the May deal version of Brexit offers most of the advantages the Leave campaign promised: an end to free movement, taking back control of our domestic laws to a considerable extent, an end to the CFP and CAP. Personally I don't think those are worth the economic hit, but that's what people voted for.
In other words, with May's deal Brexit would be a mistake, but not a disaster. The new line of the Brexiteers is that want to ensure it really is a disaster. It's a curious position for them to take.
I think that is a very cogent summary of the position. We voted narrowly to leave, and the deal/future agreement is leaving narrowly.
The other advantage you've left out of the deal, which many are forgetting in focussing purely on the economics, is that we are out of the political project and ever closer union.
Any form of Remain sees us tied in to that explicitly or implicitly. We will forever be able to choose the level of co-operation the UK has with a single EU armed force, single tax area, single currency, single national anthem, etc etc.
This is a precious freedom for many of us who voted Leave fearful of the end destination.
TheWhiteRabbit - the issue that concerns me is not exporters and standards but the "backstop's" implication that the UK could remain forever a satellite of the EU if the EU prevaricates over the FTA which would make a backstop unnecessary. On this I am somewhat relieved by Richard Nabavi's answer that it is not in their interest to do so.
The backstop grants to rUK a status that the EU would never give to an applicant nation, and a status to NI that the UK would never have asked for if the UK had not joined in 1972 but was doing so now.
My only hesitation is the status of the rUK is something we'd quite like the EU to make peace with.
Can I just say, completely off topic, that what UKIP is doing teaming up with Tommy Robinson is an utter disgrace. I hope UKIP disappear.
But to give airtime to that man - a convicted fraudster, a man who doesn't give a toss about poor girls being raped except insofar as it allows him to pose as some sort of a "defender of his people" and get gullible Americans and others to give him money so that he can live in a luxurious house in a gated community - shows that UKIP have lost what little moral compass they may ever have had.
God knows we do need to address the very real issues associated with integration of some Muslim communities and the attitude of some Muslim men to women and, indeed, the desirability of continued immigration into this country from parts of the Muslim world.
But this is absolutely not the way to do it. The disappearance of the BNP and the NF and similar groupuscules has been a good thing. We do not need their like resurrected now.
UKIP have always been like this, once you removed the facade UKIP have always been the BNP in blazers.
I did warn Kippers but they laughed it off.
UKIP might end up being a proscribed organisation like Combat 18 given the nasty side of the EDL.
Brexit has emboldened further.
It's not just the EDL side which I find repellent. Nor the fact that people like him care nothing about the girls; they are just a convenient peg on which to hang their dislike of "Pakis" (to use a phrase that used to be common amongst BNP types). These two factors alone should be enough.
But Robinson is so obviously a crook and a fraudster.
How can people be so taken in?
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
Tommy Robinson and his friends don't like Pakis and the whole multiculturalism, the latter chimes in with UKIP's worldview.
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
Can I just say, completely off topic, that what UKIP is doing teaming up with Tommy Robinson is an utter disgrace. I hope UKIP disappear.
But to give airtime to that man - a convicted fraudster, a man who doesn't give a toss about poor girls being raped except insofar as it allows him to pose as some sort of a "defender of his people" and get gullible Americans and others to give him money so that he can live in a luxurious house in a gated community - shows that UKIP have lost what little moral compass they may ever have had.
God knows we do need to address the very real issues associated with integration of some Muslim communities and the attitude of some Muslim men to women and, indeed, the desirability of continued immigration into this country from parts of the Muslim world.
But this is absolutely not the way to do it. The disappearance of the BNP and the NF and similar groupuscules has been a good thing. We do not need their like resurrected now.
UKIP have always been like this, once you removed the facade UKIP have always been the BNP in blazers.
I did warn Kippers but they laughed it off.
UKIP might end up being a proscribed organisation like Combat 18 given the nasty side of the EDL.
Brexit has emboldened further.
It's not just the EDL side which I find repellent. Nor the fact that people like him care nothing about the girls; they are just a convenient peg on which to hang their dislike of "Pakis" (to use a phrase that used to be common amongst BNP types). These two factors alone should be enough.
But Robinson is so obviously a crook and a fraudster.
How can people be so taken in?
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
Too many people will excuse anything that members of their own side do.
True.
It doesn't explain those daft MPs, though. Too many people are too willing to believe bullshit.
Can I just say, completely off topic, that what UKIP is doing teaming up with Tommy Robinson is an utter disgrace. I hope UKIP disappear.
God knows we do need to address the very real issues associated with integration of some Muslim communities and the attitude of some Muslim men to women and, indeed, the desirability of continued immigration into this country from parts of the Muslim world.
But this is absolutely not the way to do it. The disappearance of the BNP and the NF and similar groupuscules has been a good thing. We do not need their like resurrected now.
UKIP have always been like this, once you removed the facade UKIP have always been the BNP in blazers.
I did warn Kippers but they laughed it off.
UKIP might end up being a proscribed organisation like Combat 18 given the nasty side of the EDL.
Brexit has emboldened further.
It's not just the EDL side which I find repellent. Nor the fact that people like him care nothing about the girls; they are just a convenient peg on which to hang their dislike of "Pakis" (to use a phrase that used to be common amongst BNP types). These two factors alone should be enough.
But Robinson is so obviously a crook and a fraudster.
How can people be so taken in?
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
This post pretty much sums up the disconnect between the political class and a lot of ordinary working class people.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
Tommy Robinson and his friends don't like Pakis and the whole multiculturalism, the latter chimes in with UKIP's worldview.
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
I find the use of this language utterly unacceptable - the P word is offensive
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
Tommy Robinson and his friends don't like Pakis and the whole multiculturalism, the latter chimes in with UKIP's worldview.
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
I find the use of this language utterly unacceptable - the P word is offensive
You haven't lived until you've had the P word chanted at you by a few hundred EDL supporters, like I did in Piccadilly Gardens back in 2009.
Look, let's be honest. The gammons voting for UKIP now are not doing so because they're Eurosceptic, but because they're Islamosceptic.
UKIP is the only UK political party that puts intense victimisation of Muslims as a main plank of their policy raft. So at least we now know what percentage of the UK electorate thinks hating Muslims outstrips all other political concerns.
I think that is quite likely. But as things stand it's not looking enough.
Without DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~50) With DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~30)
And the chances of that seem very remote, only about 10 Labour names have been mentioned as possible supporters of the deal and some of them have declared publicly they will not vote for it (Hoey, Stringer etc).
This post pretty much sums up the disconnect between the political class and a lot of ordinary working class people.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
Hardly any Leave voters make the logical connection that if the deal's worse than remaining it's because staying in the EU is better than leaving.
I'm changing my view somewhat. I'm beginning to think Brexit is actually unworkable, and not just full of contradictions and very crap.
It's certainly workable, if Brexiteers want it to work. The workable version is what Theresa May is proposing. Of course in economic terms is not as good as remaining in the EU with Cameron't renegotiation package would have been, but we all knew that Brexit was going to be a net economic disbenefit, so that's not news. Against the economic disadvantages, the May deal version of Brexit offers most of the advantages the Leave campaign promised: an end to free movement, taking back control of our domestic laws to a considerable extent, an end to the CFP and CAP. Personally I don't think those are worth the economic hit, but that's what people voted for.
In other words, with May's deal Brexit would be a mistake, but not a disaster. The new line of the Brexiteers is that want to ensure it really is a disaster. It's a curious position for them to take.
No, the issue is that leavers have always [funnily enough] contended that leaving wouldn't be a disaster. It is remainers saying that to leave properly would be a disaster.
You haven't lived until you've had the P word chanted at you by a few hundred EDL supporters, like I did in Piccadilly Gardens back in 2009.
But it does look like intense hatred of Muslims isn't, of itself, much of a vote winner.
UKIP's only real policy these days is hating Muslims, and they're struggling to be little more than statistical noise in the polls.
Much better is to do something like May, who has always found ways to align her hobby of victimising immigrants with some tabloid-pleasing but utterly ineffectual crackdown on something or other.
That way you get to be a racist, and still become Prime Minister.
I think that is quite likely. But as things stand it's not looking enough.
Without DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~50) With DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~30)
And the chances of that seem very remote, only about 10 Labour names have been mentioned as possible supporters of the deal and some of them have declared publicly they will not vote for it (Hoey, Stringer etc).
Surely if the DUP back it all those Tory MPs who said they weren't happy with the Northern Ireland aspect will fall in line?
I suppose so, to some extent. The deal-trashing seems have gathered its own momentum, though.
Certainly, when you get "Brexiters" claiming that joining the Euro, breaking up the UK, giving Gibraltar to Spain, absolutely anything, is better than May's deal. I wonder if some of them just intended to sabotage Brexit from the outset.
I don't think so - it's not about the end goal. What they represent is patriotic outrage. What there is to be patriotically outraged at at any particular time isn't the point.
Although i would give the balance of probabilties to Remain in a 2nd Ref, i don't think it's a slam dunk.
If the leavers can make it about things like the Euro, and EU Army, not to mention Schengen and migration, or things like a future US of E, then that might not be attractive to re-sign up to.
Plus, we have an NHS dividend already awarded from Brexit. "Which hospital wards are you going to close, Remain?"
None, we'll just borrow the money for them. Nobody gives a fuck where money comes from.
Mcdonnel has already committed to not borrow for day to day expenditure.
Pension confiscation, anyone?
you may be right!!
the corbynista lady on this week last night (who is to be the new statesmen's economics writer) when challenged by Andrew Neil that most companies aren't owned by a rich few as she had just claimed when justifying wholesale nationalisation and state control but by pension funds etc, she then responded yes but that pension wealth is very concentrated unfairly too, most workers don't have such pension savings...
suggests the corbynista view really is that private pension savings aren't fair either...
Jeremy Corbyn couldn't even bring himself to mention the right to private property when asked to name one good thing about capitalism. I am not surprised that some of his more ignorant supporters believe that all property is theft or similar. It has been only relatively recently that we have heard people talk about land nationalisation and renationalising all ex-council houses and the like. What do people expect when the opposition has been taken over by the Far Left?
Whilst I disagree that all property is theft, some of the landed gentry probably appropriated more than they should with the Inclosure act of 1773 ^_~
Voters rejected the idea of a second referendum to choose between the draft withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU with no deal by 19 points – though one in five said they didn’t know. However, there was only a 9-point margin against a referendum to choose between the draft deal and remaining in the EU....
.....There was less appetite for a general election. Only just over one in five – including fewer than four in ten Labour voters – said there should be a new election before the terms of Brexit are finalised. Only just over one in three said a general election should take place if Theresa May were replaced as PM before the Brexit deal was signed and sealed.
This post pretty much sums up the disconnect between the political class and a lot of ordinary working class people.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
The question is whether the Pakistani community in general reject (or not) a culture which appears to tolerate Pakistani gangs abusing non Muslim young white girls. Does multiculturalism mean accepting such a culture?
Voters rejected the idea of a second referendum to choose between the draft withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU with no deal by 19 points – though one in five said they didn’t know. However, there was only a 9-point margin against a referendum to choose between the draft deal and remaining in the EU.
Interesting. A lot of the back and forth over here recently has centered on a warming to Theresa May must have meant a warming to her deal.
This appears to be untrue. Whatever credit she's getting for making a good stab of playing that bad hand she dealt herself, the electorate seem to hate the deal as much as Parliament does.
Once again, it does make you appreciate how lucky May is to be squaring off against a LOTO as hopeless as Corbyn.
Look, let's be honest. The gammons voting for UKIP now are not doing so because they're Eurosceptic, but because they're Islamosceptic.
UKIP is the only UK political party that puts intense victimisation of Muslims as a main plank of their policy raft. So at least we now know what percentage of the UK electorate thinks hating Muslims outstrips all other political concerns.
when we reach the point where even Farage is calling out UKIP for this (R4 interview this morning) we know UKIP is nearing rock bottom
This post pretty much sums up the disconnect between the political class and a lot of ordinary working class people.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
Political class thinking is dominated by in-groups and out-groups. You can only criticise the in-group and must never criticise the out-group.
But in these child rape cases it shows how ridiculous the whole charade is. You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves. Purely because of the respective race of the groups. Your main focus and source of outrage is whether people trying to stop the rapes from happening are being even-handed about totally unrelated stuff.
You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs. That's the biggest issue to you in the matter. Seriously. And you're not alone...this is standard political thinking and I would wager would match 90% of the people on here's thoughts on the matter. Can you not see how utterly crazy it is?
Voters rejected the idea of a second referendum to choose between the draft withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU with no deal by 19 points – though one in five said they didn’t know. However, there was only a 9-point margin against a referendum to choose between the draft deal and remaining in the EU.
Interesting. A lot of the back and forth over here recently has centered on a warming to Theresa May must have meant a warming to her deal.
This appears to be untrue. Whatever credit she's getting for making a good stab of playing that bad hand she dealt herself, the electorate seem to hate the deal as much as Parliament does.
Once again, it does make you appreciate how lucky May is to be squaring off against a LOTO as hopeless as Corbyn.
I don't know. If they hated the deal, they should support a second referendum.
Instead they back the Deal over No Deal, but back Remain over the Deal, consistent with the mood music.
You haven't lived until you've had the P word chanted at you by a few hundred EDL supporters, like I did in Piccadilly Gardens back in 2009.
But it does look like intense hatred of Muslims isn't, of itself, much of a vote winner.
UKIP's only real policy these days is hating Muslims, and they're struggling to be little more than statistical noise in the polls.
Much better is to do something like May, who has always found ways to align her hobby of victimising immigrants with some tabloid-pleasing but utterly ineffectual crackdown on something or other.
That way you get to be a racist, and still become Prime Minister.
Surely you're not suggesting that poor sweet dear frightened-rabbit May is capable of pandering to xenophobes too?
Voters rejected the idea of a second referendum to choose between the draft withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU with no deal by 19 points – though one in five said they didn’t know. However, there was only a 9-point margin against a referendum to choose between the draft deal and remaining in the EU.
Interesting. A lot of the back and forth over here recently has centered on a warming to Theresa May must have meant a warming to her deal.
This appears to be untrue. Whatever credit she's getting for making a good stab of playing that bad hand she dealt herself, the electorate seem to hate the deal as much as Parliament does.
Once again, it does make you appreciate how lucky May is to be squaring off against a LOTO as hopeless as Corbyn.
I don't know. If they hated the deal, they should support a second referendum.
Instead they back the Deal over No Deal, but back Remain over the Deal, consistent with the mood music.
It does seem like the outcome with the fewest net-net political costs will be Remain, but it's entirely unclear how Remain comes about from this Parliament, without a People's Vote and/or Corbyn making the same damascene conversion to remainerhood as Dom Raab.
Perhaps the Conservative Party could stop navel gazing and start thinking about consequences.
I'm trying to but the bellends that are Raab and Davis are focussing on finding out that Calais is close to Dover and that No Deal means no transition.
If there really was a God, he'd me smiting down the loons who are set to ensure a Corbyn Premiership.
UKIP descends into Civil War as former leader Nigel Farage asks its executive to hold a no confidence vote in leader Gerard Batten after he appoints Tommy Robinson as an adviser
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
Political class thinking is dominated by in-groups and out-groups. You can only criticise the in-group and must never criticise the out-group.
But in these child rape cases it shows how ridiculous the whole charade is. You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves. Purely because of the respective race of the groups. Your main focus and source of outrage is whether people trying to stop the rapes from happening are being even-handed about totally unrelated stuff.
You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs. That's the biggest issue to you in the matter. Seriously. And you're not alone...this is standard political thinking and I would wager would match 90% of the people on here's thoughts on the matter. Can you not see how utterly crazy it is?
"You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves."
Nope. Try again.
"You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs."
Yes, I did. Because for all the evil harm these gangs did, they're only a tiny proportion of all the abuse, sexual yet alone non-sexual, that goes on against boys and girls. And too many people who mention these gangs routinely ignore other cases, small and large - and these need tackling just as much as those tragic and evil cases.
If people complaining about the gangs seems genuinely interested in the welfare of the victims, what you would say is fair enough. But sadly it seems all too far from their minds, and what motivates them is the perpetrators' ethnicity.
Sometimes this is extended to the victims, with 'white girls' (often capitalised) being important, ignoring the victims of other ethnicities know to have been abused.
Voters rejected the idea of a second referendum to choose between the draft withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU with no deal by 19 points – though one in five said they didn’t know. However, there was only a 9-point margin against a referendum to choose between the draft deal and remaining in the EU.
Interesting. A lot of the back and forth over here recently has centered on a warming to Theresa May must have meant a warming to her deal.
This appears to be untrue. Whatever credit she's getting for making a good stab of playing that bad hand she dealt herself, the electorate seem to hate the deal as much as Parliament does.
Once again, it does make you appreciate how lucky May is to be squaring off against a LOTO as hopeless as Corbyn.
On the basis of that poll May could call a Remain v her Deal poll if she cannot get her Deal through Parliament
Hardly any Leave voters make the logical connection that if the deal's worse than remaining it's because staying in the EU is better than leaving.
I'm changing my view somewhat. I'm beginning to think Brexit is actually unworkable, and not just full of contradictions and very crap.
It's certainly workable, if Brexiteers want it to work. The workable version is what Theresa May is proposing. Of course in economic terms is not as good as remaining in the EU with Cameron't renegotiation package would have been, but we all knew that Brexit was going to be a net economic disbenefit, so that's not news. Against the economic disadvantages, the May deal version of Brexit offers most of the advantages the Leave campaign promised: an end to free movement, taking back control of our domestic laws to a considerable extent, an end to the CFP and CAP. Personally I don't think those are worth the economic hit, but that's what people voted for.
In other words, with May's deal Brexit would be a mistake, but not a disaster. The new line of the Brexiteers is that want to ensure it really is a disaster. It's a curious position for them to take.
No, the issue is that leavers have always [funnily enough] contended that leaving wouldn't be a disaster. It is remainers saying that to leave properly would be a disaster.
By 'properly' you mean some new version of ultra-destructive crash-out Brexit, which bears zero relation to what the Leave campaigners campaigned on - remember all that stuff about reaching an amicable arrangement - the easiest in history - which would mean we were part of 'a free trade deal from Ireland to Turkey' and a smooth transition where 'nothing would change on the day after Brexit' and all that guff?
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
Political class thinking is dominated by in-groups and out-groups. You can only criticise the in-group and must never criticise the out-group.
But in these child rape cases it shows how ridiculous the whole charade is. You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves. Purely because of the respective race of the groups. Your main focus and source of outrage is whether people trying to stop the rapes from happening are being even-handed about totally unrelated stuff.
You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs. That's the biggest issue to you in the matter. Seriously. And you're not alone...this is standard political thinking and I would wager would match 90% of the people on here's thoughts on the matter. Can you not see how utterly crazy it is?
"You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves."
Nope. Try again.
"You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs."
Yes, I did. Because for all the evil harm these gangs did, they're only a tiny proportion of all the abuse, sexual yet alone non-sexual, that goes on against boys and girls. And too many people who mention these gangs routinely ignore other cases, small and large - and these need tackling just as much as those tragic and evil cases.
If people complaining about the gangs seems genuinely interested in the welfare of the victims, what you would say is fair enough. But sadly it seems all too far from their minds, and what motivates them is the perpetrators' ethnicity.
Sometimes this is extended to the victims, with 'white girls' (often capitalised) being important, ignoring the victims of other ethnicities know to have been abused.
Can you see how crazy that is?
BiB - That's quite a big claim, do you have any statistics to back that up?
iirc she was/is a researcher at Demos or IPPR (can't recall which one) and is writing a book on financialisation.
I do hope in the forthcoming GE the party makes it crystal clear that we will be electing democratic socialists and not social democrats. We wouldn't want the public being misled into believing this is going to be anything like any other Labour government would we?
In which case, the next manifesto needs to be a damn sight more honest than the last one.
I want it spelled out. How much nationalisation? When will they draw the line: BT? Or go further - any large corporate? And what about private property and land? Pensions? And the council tax levels? And CGT levels?
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
This is the Brexiteers counter strike. The last few day's has seen No 10 move to nuke No Deal first. The counter strike is Brexiteers delegitimising the Deal in the most profound way possible - saying Remaining would be better. Some #FBPE fools think this means they now favour Remaining.
I genuinely think now there is a very real possibility of Farage and Boris coming out for a Second Referendum on No Deal Vs Remain. And we never did discover what they were discussing at that Restaurant did we ?
Remain would probably beat No Deal about 55% to 45% according to polls but that 45% would match the total Yes got in Scotland in 2014 and give Farage and Boris endless scope to cry 'betrayal' (as I think they secretly wanted all along, they never actually wanted Leave to win, a narrow Remain win was always the best result for their careers)
My feeling is that No Deal beats Remain because in the end the campaign would become the Prime Minister telling the electorate to choose between two options, but you can't choose one of the options it is crazy. I think at the moment the electorate is minded to blow a raspberry at commands that it can't choose to do things (note this could also apply to Corbyn).
That said I cannot envisage May calling a referendum without her deal being on the ballot paper - the struggle will be what is up against it.
Nope, virtually no chance No Deal beats Remain as about 10% to 20% of the Leave vote was soft Brexiteers who would switch to Remain over the economic damage of No Deal.
Remember Leave only scraped 52% with single market backers, 'easiest deal in history' believers and immigration haters and Singapore lovers all in its tent
10-20% of the Remain vote I'm sure would be susceptible to the "who governs Britain" argument.
If they voted Remain last time no Remainers are switching
Bold statement. Already we have our own @Richard_Nabavi voting Leave next time if there were to be a second referendum.
Only in the event of the Deal, he would vote Remain over No Deal as I would
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
Political class thinking is dominated by in-groups and out-groups. You can only criticise the in-group and must never criticise the out-group.
You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs. That's the biggest issue to you in the matter. Seriously. And you're not alone...this is standard political thinking and I would wager would match 90% of the people on here's thoughts on the matter. Can you not see how utterly crazy it is?
"You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves."
Nope. Try again.
"You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs."
Yes, I did. Because for all the evil harm these gangs did, they're only a tiny proportion of all the abuse, sexual yet alone non-sexual, that goes on against boys and girls. And too many people who mention these gangs routinely ignore other cases, small and large - and these need tackling just as much as those tragic and evil cases.
If people complaining about the gangs seems genuinely interested in the welfare of the victims, what you would say is fair enough. But sadly it seems all too far from their minds, and what motivates them is the perpetrators' ethnicity.
Sometimes this is extended to the victims, with 'white girls' (often capitalised) being important, ignoring the victims of other ethnicities know to have been abused.
Can you see how crazy that is?
"Yes, I did"
This says it all. More worried about not being seen to be racist than these kids being raped.
If the races were reversed you wouldn't be getting so agitated about mentioning the race factor which has motivated these crimes, which has been very well documented.
For example Baroness Warsi stated that a minority of Pakistani men see white girls as fair game, I guess she's a racist too.
As I said before only the in-group is allowed to be criticised and all sorts of mental gymnastics will be performed to make that the source of the outrage.
Perhaps the Conservative Party could stop navel gazing and start thinking about consequences.
Which John McD is the real one?
Last week he was in the Newstatesman posing as a mild mannered provincial bank manager, reassuring everyone that hardly anyone would pay more tax and that everything had to be done in a sensible, restrained manner, because they need to reach out to ordinary middle income voters.
This week, he seems to be rebuilding Britain as modern version of the Soviets.
I think that is quite likely. But as things stand it's not looking enough.
Without DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~50) With DUP votes, May needs significant Labour support (~30)
And the chances of that seem very remote, only about 10 Labour names have been mentioned as possible supporters of the deal and some of them have declared publicly they will not vote for it (Hoey, Stringer etc).
Although there is a real possibility (in my mind at least) that there are a reasonably sized bunch of Labour names who will not vote for it, but won't vote against it either. I suspect that a number of the Tory 'rebels' might end up in that position too ("it's a bad deal so I can't vote for it" potentially leads to "it's the only version of leave on the table, so I won't block it")
Maybe I'm just trying to see a way through for the deal to pass because it so obviously should in my mind. (It respects the referendum result, focuses on the things which Leave campaigned on, gives the potential to move in a number of different directions after transition)
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
The backstop grants to rUK a status that the EU would never give to an applicant nation ....
Zero-tariff access to the single market, with no EFTA £7ish billion a year and freedom of movement? A more cynical politician might just manoeuvre us to that outcome and leave it there.
Hell, that's exactly what Banks/Farrage said they wanted in the referendum campaign ..... but everybody knew it was impossible to get that agreement without yearly payments and totally bypassing the 4 freedoms.
The 100/1 on David Lidington as Next PM (Wm Hill, Fred, Betway) might not be a bad bet. As Vernon Bogdanor points out, if Theresa May goes, there could be an caretaker PM in place whilst the leadership contest happens, and it would have to be someone who's not in the running. He's deputy PM and a safe pair of hands. It's a long shot, but possibly one worth taking at those odds. DYOR, etc. (I'm on for a couple of quid at 500/1, from a few weeks ago).
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
This post pretty much sums up the disconnect between the political class and a lot of ordinary working class people.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
The biggest issue for me is that too many of the people who show concern for child rape gangs utterly ignore other, similar events (and sometimes worse), and routinely dismiss womens' (and sometimes even mens') issues.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
The biggest issue for me is the past willingness of people who have been charged with child protection to look the other way while this was taking place.
Leaver woman asked flat our if she preferred remain to this deal, unable to speak, let alone answer.
Fraser Nelson reckons many Brexiteer MPs would answer remain, and posited many 'wavering centrists" might also agree.
Have the headbangers really snatched defeat from the jaws of victory?
If you count Theresa May as a headbanger then yes absolutely. This is her defeat and her awful deal. I'd rather remain than this, but then I didn't want May in charge.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
I don't think that birthrate would cut the population to that extent.
The 100/1 on David Lidington as Next PM (Wm Hill, Fred, Betway) might not be a bad bet. As Vernon Bogdanor points out, if Theresa May goes, there could be an caretaker PM in place whilst the leadership contest happens, and it would have to be someone who's not in the running. He's deputy PM and a safe pair of hands. It's a long shot, but possibly one worth taking at those odds. DYOR, etc. (I'm on for a couple of quid at 500/1, from a few weeks ago).
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
I don't think that birthrate would cut the population to that extent.
"You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves."
Nope. Try again.
"You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs."
Yes, I did. Because for all the evil harm these gangs did, they're only a tiny proportion of all the abuse, sexual yet alone non-sexual, that goes on against boys and girls. And too many people who mention these gangs routinely ignore other cases, small and large - and these need tackling just as much as those tragic and evil cases.
If people complaining about the gangs seems genuinely interested in the welfare of the victims, what you would say is fair enough. But sadly it seems all too far from their minds, and what motivates them is the perpetrators' ethnicity.
Sometimes this is extended to the victims, with 'white girls' (often capitalised) being important, ignoring the victims of other ethnicities know to have been abused.
Can you see how crazy that is?
BiB - That's quite a big claim, do you have any statistics to back that up?
Statistics are obviously hard to come by (especially since reporting abuse can be hard), but there are some fairly staggering statistics on that page.
When I was a teenager, I overheard a man saying something like: "If they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to f**k." If people are wondering about ethnicity and background, he was about as WWC as you can get.
On a personal level, at uni a few years later, I had three female friends tell me, over the space of a few weeks, about how they had been abused. Two by family members. None of them reported it, and in one case she told her family, who did not believe her. Later still, a woman told me about how she had been abused by her dad.
Such stories have rather coloured my views since.
And the adult stats are terrible as well, with 3% of women, and 0.8% of men 16-59, having been sexually assaulted in the last year.
Perhaps the Conservative Party could stop navel gazing and start thinking about consequences.
Which John McD is the real one?
Last week he was in the Newstatesman posing as a mild mannered provincial bank manager, reassuring everyone that hardly anyone would pay more tax and that everything had to be done in a sensible, restrained manner, because they need to reach out to ordinary middle income voters.
This week, he seems to be rebuilding Britain as modern version of the Soviets.
I'm not sure you understand his political philosophy at all. The entire point is that the system concentrates wealth into a tiny elite which is certainly much, much smaller than the top 5%- and that's not even starting on the difference between income and wealth (which is far less equally distributed). Focusing on a small percentage rather than taxing the 20% to benefit the 80% isn't a compromise to electability, it's a central feature of his politics.
Whether any of this is realistic or achievable is, of course, an entirely different question.
I thought it was a complete mystery that he wasn't given the Brexit Secy's job when Raab went off in the huff.
No mystery David, he is a useless pipsqueak, no principles or his own man, just weaselly words to defend the party line. Hopefully he never gets anywhere near the levers of power.
Agreed Rory S is a bluffer.......spends about 3.5 months on an Army gap year commission (no real training at Sandhurst, more like a work placement), does a couple of jobs at FCO and then goes on to claim he commanded Maysan province (which is bollox) in Iraq....he was/is a functionary with a good PR - the guy tells a good story and not much else. mind you look at Boris J - never afraid of a bit of bluff and he did well with the Tory faithful......
Seems to be standard for Tories, look at Cameron , he had a pretend job then PM.
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Before he started talking about rape gangs, Robinson had been jailed for assault (2005), for illegally entering the United States using a false passport (2012) for a £160,000 mortgage fraud (2014). He's also had convictions for drugs offences and public order offences.
Do you think the political classes went back in time and framed Robinson for all these offences? Or maybe, just maybe, the reason he keeps getting locked up is because he keeps breaking the law, and is among the last people you'd ever want to talk to on law and order issues?
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The 100/1 on David Lidington as Next PM (Wm Hill, Fred, Betway) might not be a bad bet. As Vernon Bogdanor points out, if Theresa May goes, there could be an caretaker PM in place whilst the leadership contest happens, and it would have to be someone who's not in the running. He's deputy PM and a safe pair of hands. It's a long shot, but possibly one worth taking at those odds. DYOR, etc. (I'm on for a couple of quid at 500/1, from a few weeks ago).
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
I actually managed to back him for a couple of quid at 1000/1 earlier in the year.
I do even better if he's next Conservative leader.
TheWhiteRabbit - the issue that concerns me is not exporters and standards but the "backstop's" implication that the UK could remain forever a satellite of the EU if the EU prevaricates over the FTA which would make a backstop unnecessary. On this I am somewhat relieved by Richard Nabavi's answer that it is not in their interest to do so.
Only 22% back a general election before Brexit rising to 35% if May is replaced as PM.
Voters oppose a second EU referendum with a Remain v No Deal question by a big 50% to 31% margin and with a Remain v Deal question by a smaller 47% to 38% margin.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
I don't think that birthrate would cut the population to that extent.
Yeah, you're right.
I made the assumption that the average breeding age is 20, but that's pretty low, turns out it's around 24 for a first child. Let's make it 25 for QuickMath
After 50 years, the replacement rate would be .85^2=72% After 75 years, the replacement rate 61% After 100 years the replacement rate is 50%
So, we're still evaporating, just not that fast.
Now Japan, really are screwed. A fertility rate of 1.4 babies per woman
After 50 years they're at 50% replacement rate After 100 years they're at 25% replacement rate.
And Japan has really tight immigration laws. Japan might simply cease to exist over the next century unless something changes.
This says it all. More worried about not being seen to be racist than these kids being raped.
If the races were reversed you wouldn't be getting so agitated about mentioning the race factor which has motivated these crimes, which has been very well documented.
For example Baroness Warsi stated that a minority of Pakistani men see white girls as fair game, I guess she's a racist too.
As I said before only the in-group is allowed to be criticised and all sorts of mental gymnastics will be performed to make that the source of the outrage.
I might suggest you read my reasoning, which follows the admission.
"If the races were reversed you wouldn't be getting so agitated about mentioning the race factor ..."
Ah, thanks for telling me what I would and wold not get agitated about. As it happens, you are wrong.
"As I said before only the in-group is allowed to be criticised"
I have condemned these gangs on here many times in the past. Please try again.
The 100/1 on David Lidington as Next PM (Wm Hill, Fred, Betway) might not be a bad bet. As Vernon Bogdanor points out, if Theresa May goes, there could be an caretaker PM in place whilst the leadership contest happens, and it would have to be someone who's not in the running. He's deputy PM and a safe pair of hands. It's a long shot, but possibly one worth taking at those odds. DYOR, etc. (I'm on for a couple of quid at 500/1, from a few weeks ago).
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
The 100/1 on David Lidington as Next PM (Wm Hill, Fred, Betway) might not be a bad bet. As Vernon Bogdanor points out, if Theresa May goes, there could be an caretaker PM in place whilst the leadership contest happens, and it would have to be someone who's not in the running. He's deputy PM and a safe pair of hands. It's a long shot, but possibly one worth taking at those odds. DYOR, etc. (I'm on for a couple of quid at 500/1, from a few weeks ago).
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
I actually managed to back him for a couple of quid at 1000/1 earlier in the year.
I do even better if he's next Conservative leader.
Interesting bet, thanks chaps. I think a couple of quid may be in order on this one.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
Um..,. slightly dodgy maths there. INE, but to me:
At a birth rate of 1.7 per female, each generation is replacing 85% of itself. Assuming that each generation is a 25 year interval, and survives for 75 years - you are a long way from halving the population in 50 years.
The replacement rate in 50 years would be 85% x 2 generations = 72%, and that's without the delayed effect of previous generations dying.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
I don't think that birthrate would cut the population to that extent.
Yeah, you're right.
I made the assumption that the average breeding age is 20, but that's pretty low, turns out it's around 24 for a first child. Let's make it 25 for QuickMath
After 50 years, the replacement rate would be .85^2=72% After 75 years, the replacement rate 61% After 100 years the replacement rate is 50%
So, we're still evaporating, just not that fast.
Now Japan, really are screwed. A fertility rate of 1.4 babies per woman
After 50 years they're at 50% replacement rate After 100 years they're at 25% replacement rate.
And Japan has really tight immigration laws. Japan might simply cease to exist over the next century unless something changes.
May appears to have intimated that if her deal is rejected by Parliament then we leave with no deal.
It took the presenter about 8 goes to get an answer from her.
If that is what she is saying, she has been grossly negligent in failing to prepare for no deal. If she wants Corbyn to be her successor, she is going the right way about it.
Perhaps the Conservative Party could stop navel gazing and start thinking about consequences.
Which John McD is the real one?
Last week he was in the Newstatesman posing as a mild mannered provincial bank manager, reassuring everyone that hardly anyone would pay more tax and that everything had to be done in a sensible, restrained manner, because they need to reach out to ordinary middle income voters.
This week, he seems to be rebuilding Britain as modern version of the Soviets.
I'm not sure you understand his political philosophy at all. The entire point is that the system concentrates wealth into a tiny elite which is certainly much, much smaller than the top 5%- and that's not even starting on the difference between income and wealth (which is far less equally distributed). Focusing on a small percentage rather than taxing the 20% to benefit the 80% isn't a compromise to electability, it's a central feature of his politics.
Whether any of this is realistic or achievable is, of course, an entirely different question.
I don't think wealth is that highly concentrated. Yes, the top 1% are very rich, but the median household has net wealth of £278,000.
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
Nice to hear some positive news
This list is very positive news: only 35 countries have a fertility rate of 4 or more according to the latest data.
The UK's birth rate is 1.7 children per female. Which means without immigration, the UK's population would be half what it is now in 50 years, and we'd be reduced to 15% of our current population in a century.
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
I don't think that birthrate would cut the population to that extent.
Yeah, you're right.
I made the assumption that the average breeding age is 20, but that's pretty low, turns out it's around 24 for a first child. Let's make it 25 for QuickMath
After 50 years, the replacement rate would be .85^2=72% After 75 years, the replacement rate 61% After 100 years the replacement rate is 50%
So, we're still evaporating, just not that fast.
Now Japan, really are screwed. A fertility rate of 1.4 babies per woman
After 50 years they're at 50% replacement rate After 100 years they're at 25% replacement rate.
And Japan has really tight immigration laws. Japan might simply cease to exist over the next century unless something changes.
The people of Japan should be applauded for this. If Japan became devoid of humans, this would be a good thing. Hopefully the rest of the world will follow.
Comments
[reading the Sanchez tweet]
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/us-jewish-lobby-nigel-farage-power-anti-semitism-ukip-leader-a8031191.html
I think what's happening here is that the Brexit Buccaneers are trying to avoid blame. Now that May has made it quite clear that No Deal isn't on the cards, the Brexiteers have to make the calculation "what will incur more blame for me, personally?"
Since it seems now pretty much universally accepted that May's deal will be significantly worse for the country than Remain, maybe it's not surprising the Buccaneers have made a damascene conversion to continuity remain.
Sure, there'll be a short term hit to their popularity amongst the gammon faced men, but in the medium-long term, they won't have to suffer being saddled with the never ending fallout from the botched brexit negotations and May's squalid little deal.
Expect more Brexit big names going Hard Remain soon. Boris can't be far behind.
My only hesitation is the status of the rUK is something we'd quite like the EU to make peace with.
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
But yes, the Parliamentary mood started negative on the deal and gets more hostile by the hour.
I doubt Brexit now apparently meaning Remain will slow this rising tide at all.
Literally anyone who publicly shows concern for extreme Islam and the child rape gangs (that seem to be operating in every town in Britain with a sizeable Pakistani community) is accused of being a disgusting racist who is only doing it because they hate "Pakis".
In fact the political class gets far more agitated about him bringing attention to these cases than the actual rape of girls in their thousands. It's facilitating rape on an industrial scale whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back about what wonderful people they are (whilst making sure them and their children live as far away from these areas as they possibly can).
They'll demonise this bloke and find any excuse to lock him away forever using whatever pretext they can find and do exactly the same to the next bloke who tries to tackle these issues.
Meanwhile the rapes continue unhindered and extreme Islam continues to grow.
If someone like Trump ever gets in they'll be the first ones asking BUT WHY!?
How can people be so taken in?
I know the answer: if over 100 MPs can sign a petition to let that self-pitying fraudster, Adoboli, stay in the country (now rightly deported) then what hope is there for a moron like Batten to have some common and moral sense.
Why can't people see what is in front of their nose???
Tommy Robinson and his friends don't like Pakis and the whole multiculturalism, the latter chimes in with UKIP's worldview.
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
I find the use of this language utterly unacceptable - the P word is offensive
Having engaged with the EDL earlier on this year it is all rather frightening.
I find the use of this language utterly unacceptable - the P word is offensive
You haven't lived until you've had the P word chanted at you by a few hundred EDL supporters, like I did in Piccadilly Gardens back in 2009.
UKIP is the only UK political party that puts intense victimisation of Muslims as a main plank of their policy raft. So at least we now know what percentage of the UK electorate thinks hating Muslims outstrips all other political concerns.
Hence it is hard not to believe they are more bothered about the identity of the perpetrators than justice for the victims.
UKIP's only real policy these days is hating Muslims, and they're struggling to be little more than statistical noise in the polls.
Much better is to do something like May, who has always found ways to align her hobby of victimising immigrants with some tabloid-pleasing but utterly ineffectual crackdown on something or other.
That way you get to be a racist, and still become Prime Minister.
.....There was less appetite for a general election. Only just over one in five – including fewer than four in ten Labour voters – said there should be a new election before the terms of Brexit are finalised. Only just over one in three said a general election should take place if Theresa May were replaced as PM before the Brexit deal was signed and sealed.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2018/11/my-new-brexit-poll-good-for-theresa-may-bad-for-her-deal/
This appears to be untrue. Whatever credit she's getting for making a good stab of playing that bad hand she dealt herself, the electorate seem to hate the deal as much as Parliament does.
Once again, it does make you appreciate how lucky May is to be squaring off against a LOTO as hopeless as Corbyn.
But in these child rape cases it shows how ridiculous the whole charade is. You are more angry about people bringing attention to the rapes, than the rapes themselves. Purely because of the respective race of the groups. Your main focus and source of outrage is whether people trying to stop the rapes from happening are being even-handed about totally unrelated stuff.
You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs. That's the biggest issue to you in the matter. Seriously. And you're not alone...this is standard political thinking and I would wager would match 90% of the people on here's thoughts on the matter. Can you not see how utterly crazy it is?
Instead they back the Deal over No Deal, but back Remain over the Deal, consistent with the mood music.
If there really was a God, he'd me smiting down the loons who are set to ensure a Corbyn Premiership.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46308160
Theresa's deal is rejected by parliament.
Theresa resigns.
A new PM with suitable Brexit credentials (Boris, DD) is installed.
After much toing and froing between Brussels, the new PM comes back with another deal that is logically indistinguishable from Theresa's.
The Brexit Ultras hail it as a triumph and it's passed into law.
Nope. Try again.
"You literally even said above that the biggest issue for you is the motivation for those concerned about the child rape gangs."
Yes, I did. Because for all the evil harm these gangs did, they're only a tiny proportion of all the abuse, sexual yet alone non-sexual, that goes on against boys and girls. And too many people who mention these gangs routinely ignore other cases, small and large - and these need tackling just as much as those tragic and evil cases.
If people complaining about the gangs seems genuinely interested in the welfare of the victims, what you would say is fair enough. But sadly it seems all too far from their minds, and what motivates them is the perpetrators' ethnicity.
Sometimes this is extended to the victims, with 'white girls' (often capitalised) being important, ignoring the victims of other ethnicities know to have been abused.
Can you see how crazy that is?
Interesting that the US population has been increasing by less than 2 million a year over the last few years. That's a lot lower than the demographers were forecasting. The fertility rate is a lot lower than expected, just 1.87 compared to 1.88 in the UK, and deaths are higher than expected due to the drugs crisis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_five_live
iirc she was/is a researcher at Demos or IPPR (can't recall which one) and is writing a book on financialisation.
I do hope in the forthcoming GE the party makes it crystal clear that we will be electing democratic socialists and not social democrats. We wouldn't want the public being misled into believing this is going to be anything like any other Labour government would we?
In which case, the next manifesto needs to be a damn sight more honest than the last one.
I want it spelled out. How much nationalisation? When will they draw the line: BT? Or go further - any large corporate? And what about private property and land? Pensions? And the council tax levels? And CGT levels?
I could go on, but you get my drift.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html
Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad...
Leaver woman asked flat our if she preferred remain to this deal, unable to speak, let alone answer.
Fraser Nelson reckons many Brexiteer MPs would answer remain, and posited many 'wavering centrists" might also agree.
Have the headbangers really snatched defeat from the jaws of victory?
This says it all. More worried about not being seen to be racist than these kids being raped.
If the races were reversed you wouldn't be getting so agitated about mentioning the race factor which has motivated these crimes, which has been very well documented.
For example Baroness Warsi stated that a minority of Pakistani men see white girls as fair game, I guess she's a racist too.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18117529
As I said before only the in-group is allowed to be criticised and all sorts of mental gymnastics will be performed to make that the source of the outrage.
Last week he was in the Newstatesman posing as a mild mannered provincial bank manager, reassuring everyone that hardly anyone would pay more tax and that everything had to be done in a sensible, restrained manner, because they need to reach out to ordinary middle income voters.
This week, he seems to be rebuilding Britain as modern version of the Soviets.
Maybe I'm just trying to see a way through for the deal to pass because it so obviously should in my mind. (It respects the referendum result, focuses on the things which Leave campaigned on, gives the potential to move in a number of different directions after transition)
Immigration is the only thing stopping the UK from simply evaporating.
Hell, that's exactly what Banks/Farrage said they wanted in the referendum campaign ..... but everybody knew it was impossible to get that agreement without yearly payments and totally bypassing the 4 freedoms.
Note: Formally there's no such thing as a 'caretaker PM', so I think the bet would pay out in these circumstances, but check the exact terms.
Tory voters are equally split though 35% backing May's Deal and 35% No Deal.
Voters also prefer a Tory government under May to a Labour government under Corbyn by 53% to 47%
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2018/11/my-new-brexit-poll-good-for-theresa-may-bad-for-her-deal/
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2018/11/my-new-brexit-poll-good-for-theresa-may-bad-for-her-deal/
Keys points
Labour is losing support on its issues since July 2017 but little change for the Conservatives.
Conservative votes do not think that the Deal honours the result of the referendum.
But they want the Deal to be accepted as an imperfect compromise and get on with other issues.
This suggests that the Conservative MPs could be persuaded that the Deal should be passed.
Although I believe one PBer got 350/1 the git.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/12/31/three-tips-on-who-might-be-theresa-mays-successor/
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-abuse-and-neglect/child-sexual-abuse/sexual-abuse-facts-statistics/
Statistics are obviously hard to come by (especially since reporting abuse can be hard), but there are some fairly staggering statistics on that page.
When I was a teenager, I overheard a man saying something like: "If they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to f**k." If people are wondering about ethnicity and background, he was about as WWC as you can get.
On a personal level, at uni a few years later, I had three female friends tell me, over the space of a few weeks, about how they had been abused. Two by family members. None of them reported it, and in one case she told her family, who did not believe her. Later still, a woman told me about how she had been abused by her dad.
Such stories have rather coloured my views since.
And the adult stats are terrible as well, with 3% of women, and 0.8% of men 16-59, having been sexually assaulted in the last year.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/sexualoffencesinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2017
The scale of the problem is massive.
It took the presenter about 8 goes to get an answer from her.
Whether any of this is realistic or achievable is, of course, an entirely different question.
Do you think the political classes went back in time and framed Robinson for all these offences? Or maybe, just maybe, the reason he keeps getting locked up is because he keeps breaking the law, and is among the last people you'd ever want to talk to on law and order issues?
I do even better if he's next Conservative leader.
Voters oppose a second EU referendum with a Remain v No Deal question by a big 50% to 31% margin and with a Remain v Deal question by a smaller 47% to 38% margin.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2018/11/my-new-brexit-poll-good-for-theresa-may-bad-for-her-deal/
I made the assumption that the average breeding age is 20, but that's pretty low, turns out it's around 24 for a first child. Let's make it 25 for QuickMath
After 50 years, the replacement rate would be .85^2=72%
After 75 years, the replacement rate 61%
After 100 years the replacement rate is 50%
So, we're still evaporating, just not that fast.
Now Japan, really are screwed. A fertility rate of 1.4 babies per woman
After 50 years they're at 50% replacement rate
After 100 years they're at 25% replacement rate.
And Japan has really tight immigration laws. Japan might simply cease to exist over the next century unless something changes.
"If the races were reversed you wouldn't be getting so agitated about mentioning the race factor ..."
Ah, thanks for telling me what I would and wold not get agitated about. As it happens, you are wrong.
"As I said before only the in-group is allowed to be criticised"
I have condemned these gangs on here many times in the past. Please try again.
At a birth rate of 1.7 per female, each generation is replacing 85% of itself. Assuming that each generation is a 25 year interval, and survives for 75 years - you are a long way from halving the population in 50 years.
The replacement rate in 50 years would be 85% x 2 generations = 72%, and that's without the delayed effect of previous generations dying.
I wonder if that implies she will resign.