I wonder how smart all the Remainers who voted down May's soft Brexit deal are feeling now?
About as smart as those who believed a Brexit deal will be the 'easiest thing in human history'.
Nobody said will.
Changing words in quotes, let alone taking them out of context, changes the quotes meaning. Worth remembering the old quote "nothing someone says before the word 'but' really counts".
That's well timed. I was just flagging this very thing.
"Trump is an arse BUT ..."
See?
Agreed its exactly the same . . . I am not sure to whom you're referring to but it is exact same thing.
I was referring to the "Trump is an arse BUT ..." brigade.
You are not a particular offender.
I am not any kind of offender.
Trump is an arse. No ifs, no buts. He is a disgrace, the most jawdroppingly unsuitable man to ever besmirch the Oval Office.
I hope you're right. FYI I never supported Trump. I begrudgingly supported Hillary in 2016 as the lesser of two evils.
In 2008 I bet on (and supported) Obama but would have been OK with either side winning. Same in 2012 I'd have been happy with either side winning. In 2016 I would have wanted both sides to lose, but Trump was so manifestly awful that Hillary being merely bad put her miles ahead of Trump.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
I think that is a key reason why Trump does actually do quite well. Certainly one of the reasons for me
Infantile
Why? As is seen on here, you mention you back someone that the left wing hates and it is not just a case of polite disagreement but downright name calling.
Much of the professional left-wing commentary these days reminds me of the Socrates quote in his trial "the most stupid people in the world are those who think they know anything and do not realise they know anything". They think they are right about everything and those who disagree are to be battered into submission , name called etc. It is a very unattractive trait.
Nice try but loathing of Trump is far from limited to the left-wing in this country. There are some on the right who are equally critical of Biden but I can't think of anyone else who actively supports Trump. A few may vote for him ultimately as marginally the lesser of 2 evils.
Any active Trump supporter anywhere in Europe is likely to get a lot of flak but I agree that it doesn't need to be either personal or abusive.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
Silly might be inventing your own 5 level system, and then deciding we are starting somewhere between two different levels.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Given that nurses, care workers, doctors, bus drivers, policemen, supermarket staff etc have been carrying on putting themselves at risk for 2 months now through the worst of this first wave, I wonder if the public are soon going to become resentful of teachers saying they refuse to go back to work until they decide they are safe.
I appreciate some teachers will have been carrying on and there are serious issues at stake but at times it comes across as though teachers believe they are somehow special compared to everyone else, thank goodness nurses and care workers didn't have the same attitude. Perhaps it's just the union bods that seem totally out of touch with what everyone else is going through.
The other aspect to this is that a lot of teachers have an inbuilt loathing of Conservative governments, and are very unprepared to believe their assurances that their working environment is safe. A slightly less charitable view is that a lot of them tend to act - deliberately or otherwise - as a campaigning front for the Labour party.
I am left of centre myself so not trying to make a political point. I have no school-aged family so I don't pay too much attention to the school debate but my casual observation is that teachers are in danger of being viewed as prima donnas when they are laying down the conditions on which they might deign to return to work when millions of other people have been taking far greater risks for months.
Tbh I am bemused about why the government is in such a hurry to get schools to reopen for a month or so before they all break up again for the summer holidays. When you scan the docs they've uploaded then there are justifications for different age groups, and it does not like HMG wants education to return to business as usual anyway. And if schools can go back now, why were exams cancelled? I don't know the ins and outs but as ever in this pandemic, different guidelines do not mix well, for instance wearing masks on buses but not in classrooms which have a lot more people in. And who is recruiting the army of cleaners needed for the more frequent and more rigorous daily deep-cleaning?
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
All Republican candidates are demonised and then, in later years, when it suits the Democrats, they then get lauded as "principled" and the "right" sort of Republican. Happened with Reagan, GW Bush and Romney, and even McCain.
Trump is one of a kind so I see less chance of it here. But I would disagree he has made things more dangerous and others are more to blame. Even Condolezza Rice said the biggest mistake was to let China into the WTO.
I wasn't demonizing him, I was describing him.
But, yes, "one of a kind" - I'll give you that one. He is. Certainly as regards US big ticket politics anyway.
The ironic thing is he remains unfulfilled. He would much rather be a 'strongman' kleptocrat dictator in the less developed world. He loves and rates those guys. Bet he has a picture of Vlad as his screensaver.
A good friend has had dealings with Trump (for disclosure: he is Republican but won't vote for Trump). What Trump craves most of all is how he is judged when he leaves but that he is not a natural dictator. He knows him more than I do so I will take his word for it.
But Trump is a symptom of how mainstream politicians have failed the people they were supposed to represent.
I think that may be largely true, in the pre-covid era.
Sadly many of the people who thought they were being failed by politicians are in the process of getting a fatal lesson in what failure really looks like...
Yeah, I really hope so.
In a sane world, all the Dems would need to do is keep replaying the Trump "bleach" clip over and over again until people get the message.
The trouble is it isn't a sane world.
As Trump himself said, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters.”
In a mad world, there will always be people who will vote for a mad president.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
It was the most hated presidential candidate ever vs the second most hated presidential candidate ever, and the most hated won by a whisker.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
It is based on analysis of reported data and not any new testing data.
They look at variations between local authority areas and find a negative correlation between reported infection rate and current transmission rate, and by extrapolating their data argue that this implies much more widespread asymptomatic infection.
As I said earlier, it would be a credible explanation for the apparent falling away of new infections in London, and it is hard to see any other.
Important to note however that the few antibody testing studies so far published aren’t finding widespread infection rates,
I've just had a quick look at this. It has apparently been accepted for publication.
It presents an estimate of the percentage of the population infected (and therefore immune) based on a single regression line drawn through extremely scattered data. As IanB2 says, that estimate is much larger than the indications from antibody testing.
I can't see any confidence interval or any information by which the accuracy of the estimate can be judged. I'm surprised the reviewers didn't ask for that to be added. Peer review seems not to be a very stringent process these days.
The gap in all these analyses is, I think, the sensitivity of the antibody testing.
If it is the Porton Down level that is one thing. Some tests are very insensitive and miss large numbers who have had COVID19.
Is it also possible that there is a large percentage of the population that is not very susceptible to infection for one reason or another? This would mean a smallish percentage of the population showing positive antibody tests might be a significant percentage of the susceptible population.
That is a scenario that I have thought about as well.
Another nasty one is that asymptomatic carriers are asymptomatic because they don't produce (many) antibodies.
Or that the virus is largely asymptomatic but is vulnerable to replication error that produces a nastier form. The nastier form therefore "appears" apparently randomly....
Or a combination of the above...
I had the susceptibility thought myself. The Manchester paper's regression would work best if susceptibility was very much even across the country. Variation in susceptibility between local authorities would show up in more scatter of data points.
Given it does look like there are known variations in outcomes, e.g. for BAME patients, if there is a pattern to that scatter it could reveal other findings. I've not read the paper all the way through, so I'm not sure if anything like this is covered.
Given incidents like the one in which 87% of an American choir were infected, it's a bit difficult to believe in this idea about widespread immunity.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
I disagree with that. Yes, Hillary perhaps could still have won, but she would have steamrollered any other Republican candidate, and Trump would have done the same to a generic Democratic candidate. It's a myth that they were both uniquely bad candidates.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
As you allude, there's a misconception about Trump. He presents himself as someone who likes making deals and who drives a hard bargain, but in business and politics he likes breaking deals constantly. He doesn't seem to believe that a fair deal can exist, he is always driven to renege to try and get some advantage (often fleeting).
Trump always presents himself as opposing the current 'unfair' deal (be it the Paris Accord, NAFTA, etc) and trying to renegotiate it to be fair to the US. But he never sticks with a new deal. He just opposes deals and rules generally.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
That is a particularly stupid reason to elect someone to the most powerful office in the land. Democracy does however give morons equality of voting rights, with the sage and wise
When millions of voters are dismissed and talked down to like this, it is surely a perfectly good reason.
?
Trump voter: "I'm going to vote for a malevolent arse because you won't like it" Foxy: "That would make you an idiot" Trump voter: "You see, it was a good reason"
I'm not sure what you've been drinking, but even with lockdown you do realise we're a long time from the lagershed aren't you?
Hillary Clinton was a notably poor candidate. Even in the Democratic primaries she lost to a previously barely heard of unknown Senator, then nearly lost to a geriatric socialist no-hoper Senator too. She inspired no love in the Democrat side and was hated by the Republicans. Plus by the law of 'buggins turn' it was historically the GOPs turn to win the White House anyway.
Any smart Republican would have had a great chance versus her to regain the Oval Office for their party.
Again a personal slur, and with it a hypothetical argument presented as fact.
Its not a personal slur and there is plenty of evidence. Look at the states that swung the electoral college, after eight years of Democrats controlling the White House there should have been a swing to the GOP candidate anyway but the GOP votes barely rose if they did at all under Trump.
Hillary lost because she was a pathetically poor candidate by the DNC who deliberately refused to campaign in the Midwest thus gifting the election to Trump.
There is no evidence there was a surge of turnout because of Trump.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Given that nurses, care workers, doctors, bus drivers, policemen, supermarket staff etc have been carrying on putting themselves at risk for 2 months now through the worst of this first wave, I wonder if the public are soon going to become resentful of teachers saying they refuse to go back to work until they decide they are safe.
I appreciate some teachers will have been carrying on and there are serious issues at stake but at times it comes across as though teachers believe they are somehow special compared to everyone else, thank goodness nurses and care workers didn't have the same attitude. Perhaps it's just the union bods that seem totally out of touch with what everyone else is going through.
The other aspect to this is that a lot of teachers have an inbuilt loathing of Conservative governments, and are very unprepared to believe their assurances that their working environment is safe. A slightly less charitable view is that a lot of them tend to act - deliberately or otherwise - as a campaigning front for the Labour party.
I would say that is uncharitable - what the teaching Unions say/do relates to the behaviour of the average teacher in about the same way that the NUS represents the views of the average student.
In the various private and state schools I know of, everyone is working out what can be done and how. There are concerns, but the response to things is not so much RunRoundScreamIngOnFireWhileAngry as HowCanWeMakeThisWork.
Mostly fair. I might say that the NUS is totally unrepresentative of the average student, while the teaching unions are often not very representative.
Teachers attitudes seem to me often to be HowCanWeMakeThisWorkDespiteTheGovernment, which I'm broadly fine with in the short run as long as the emphasis doesn't shift too far towards the second half.
My teacher grandchildren are both working, although conditions are rather strange. It's definitely a case of 'HowCanWe' at the schools where they teach (one Primary, one Secondary). Both are becoming concerned at the position of children/young people who are either about to change schools or face critical exams.
That's good to hear - maybe like GP practices the attitude will vary from school to school. Some will have a can-do attitude others will take the cash for a prolonged holiday and find excuses for why they can't possibly do anymore.
One of the most precious attributes I look for in employees is "Self starting".
When faced with a problem, which do you do?
- do something constructive - stop - stop and whinge
Note that it is often useful to complain, but as part of a constructive engagement with the problem and other people.
"Give me an example of when you've come across a problem in your work and bitched about other people's failure to fix it for you."
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
Yes. Wales should have adopted the UK's 5 level system and joined England at level 3.5. It makes so much sense, other non-UK countries should adopt it too.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
I think in part this splintered approach to the lockdown is a natural consequence of devolution - after all, if everybody always does the same thing and fails to take account of local conditions, then what's the point of it? But also there are political imperatives at work - as you say, they have to show everybody that they're in charge. In Wales this is because we're Labour and we don't take orders from the evil Tories. In Scotland this is because we want independence and to be rid of the evil Tories. In Northern Ireland this is because our Government is a two-headed snake and the heads are too busy trying to bite each other for the body to move very far.
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
As you allude, there's a misconception about Trump. He presents himself as someone who likes making deals and who drives a hard bargain, but in business and politics he likes breaking deals constantly. He doesn't seem to believe that a fair deal can exist, he is always driven to renege to try and get some advantage (often fleeting).
Trump always presents himself as opposing the current 'unfair' deal (be it the Paris Accord, NAFTA, etc) and trying to renegotiate it to be fair to the US. But he never sticks with a new deal. He just opposes deals and rules generally.
For him the deal is all about power, and as he has the most power, the rules are his to break at will.
I wonder how smart all the Remainers who voted down May's soft Brexit deal are feeling now?
About as smart as those who believed a Brexit deal will be the 'easiest thing in human history'.
Nobody said will.
Changing words in quotes, let alone taking them out of context, changes the quotes meaning. Worth remembering the old quote "nothing someone says before the word 'but' really counts".
That's well timed. I was just flagging this very thing.
"Trump is an arse BUT ..."
See?
Agreed its exactly the same . . . I am not sure to whom you're referring to but it is exact same thing.
I was referring to the "Trump is an arse BUT ..." brigade.
You are not a particular offender.
I am not any kind of offender.
Trump is an arse. No ifs, no buts. He is a disgrace, the most jawdroppingly unsuitable man to ever besmirch the Oval Office.
Guernsey no new cases for 14 days and down to 7 active cases. Discussion over what counts as “suppression” - (vs “elimination” for eg smallpox, or measles in Guernsey, if not the UK) - proposal being discussed include “no new cases 28 days after last active case closed”. Gradually opening up - but advice very much on “stay home” and 14 day self quarantine on arrival - which will continue indefinitely until rest of world has its act together. Estimated hit to economy is -9%.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
I think in part this splintered approach to the lockdown is a natural consequence of devolution - after all, if everybody always does the same thing and fails to take account of local conditions, then what's the point of it? But also there are political imperatives at work - as you say, they have to show everybody that they're in charge. In Wales this is because we're Labour and we don't take orders from the evil Tories. In Scotland this is because we want independence and to be rid of the evil Tories. In Northern Ireland this is because our Government is a two-headed snake and the heads are too busy trying to bite each other for the body to move very far.
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
But Trump is a symptom of how mainstream politicians have failed the people they were supposed to represent.
I think that may be largely true, in the pre-covid era.
Sadly many of the people who thought they were being failed by politicians are in the process of getting a fatal lesson in what failure really looks like...
One of the more disturbing things I saw recently was Michael Moore's recent film. It was a typically meandering, self indulgent piece supposedly about Trump but in fact the core of it was the poisoning of the population of Flint, Michigan, by interference with the water supply. It was shocking and Obama came out of it very, very badly. He came and he went and he achieved nothing. The American political class is genuinely not fit for purpose, corrupted through and through and indifferent to the lives of those it is meant to serve. I don't find it surprising that an absolute outsider like Trump proved popular and beat so many Senators, governors and insiders. He has proven to be even worse but Biden seems almost the ultimate insider, just as Hillary was.
We love to moan about our governments and rightly so but jeez, we thankfully have very little idea how bad it can be.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Given that nurses, care workers, doctors, bus drivers, policemen, supermarket staff etc have been carrying on putting themselves at risk for 2 months now through the worst of this first wave, I wonder if the public are soon going to become resentful of teachers saying they refuse to go back to work until they decide they are safe.
I appreciate some teachers will have been carrying on and there are serious issues at stake but at times it comes across as though teachers believe they are somehow special compared to everyone else, thank goodness nurses and care workers didn't have the same attitude. Perhaps it's just the union bods that seem totally out of touch with what everyone else is going through.
The other aspect to this is that a lot of teachers have an inbuilt loathing of Conservative governments, and are very unprepared to believe their assurances that their working environment is safe. A slightly less charitable view is that a lot of them tend to act - deliberately or otherwise - as a campaigning front for the Labour party.
I would say that is uncharitable - what the teaching Unions say/do relates to the behaviour of the average teacher in about the same way that the NUS represents the views of the average student.
In the various private and state schools I know of, everyone is working out what can be done and how. There are concerns, but the response to things is not so much RunRoundScreamIngOnFireWhileAngry as HowCanWeMakeThisWork.
Mostly fair. I might say that the NUS is totally unrepresentative of the average student, while the teaching unions are often not very representative.
Teachers attitudes seem to me often to be HowCanWeMakeThisWorkDespiteTheGovernment, which I'm broadly fine with in the short run as long as the emphasis doesn't shift too far towards the second half.
My teacher grandchildren are both working, although conditions are rather strange. It's definitely a case of 'HowCanWe' at the schools where they teach (one Primary, one Secondary). Both are becoming concerned at the position of children/young people who are either about to change schools or face critical exams.
That's good to hear - maybe like GP practices the attitude will vary from school to school. Some will have a can-do attitude others will take the cash for a prolonged holiday and find excuses for why they can't possibly do anymore.
One of the most precious attributes I look for in employees is "Self starting".
When faced with a problem, which do you do?
- do something constructive - stop - stop and whinge
Note that it is often useful to complain, but as part of a constructive engagement with the problem and other people.
"Give me an example of when you've come across a problem in your work and bitched about other people's failure to fix it for you."
"F^&k Yeah!" as they say in Team America
In the bowels of Christ, how I hate people like that.
I saw a TV program where a stupid reporter was goading one of the Apollo astronauts who landed on the moon. Trying to get him to say what he would have done if all hope was lost in an accident...
When asked what he would have done, if the Lunar Module ascent engine had failed and he had only 30 min air left, the astronaut replied - "Get my suit on, go outside and work on the engine for half an hour".
I find it amazing the EU thinks the UK is bluffing on this
Extension to transistion is not permitted in UK law and Barnier seems to ignore this notwithstanding Boris 80 seat majority
I do not want no deal but it is looking inevitable that on the 1st July the UK will terminate discussions and advise companies to prepare to trade under WTO
If this happens it will be a sad and disappointing end to our membership but the EU will have questions to face of their own
Its the UK who are bluffing surely. When we entered into this we understood the rules governing the working of the EU as we wrote most of them. That we then think said rules will not apply to the UK is the bluff - we don't need to have an external EU border apparently so can change our standards from the EU yet maintain an open border with the EU. Surprisingly enough the EU does think its long-standing rules apply and refuse to waive them for us.
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
All Republican candidates are demonised and then, in later years, when it suits the Democrats, they then get lauded as "principled" and the "right" sort of Republican. Happened with Reagan, GW Bush and Romney, and even McCain.
Trump is one of a kind so I see less chance of it here. But I would disagree he has made things more dangerous and others are more to blame. Even Condolezza Rice said the biggest mistake was to let China into the WTO.
I wasn't demonizing him, I was describing him.
But, yes, "one of a kind" - I'll give you that one. He is. Certainly as regards US big ticket politics anyway.
The ironic thing is he remains unfulfilled. He would much rather be a 'strongman' kleptocrat dictator in the less developed world. He loves and rates those guys. Bet he has a picture of Vlad as his screensaver.
A good friend has had dealings with Trump (for disclosure: he is Republican but won't vote for Trump). What Trump craves most of all is how he is judged when he leaves but that he is not a natural dictator. He knows him more than I do so I will take his word for it.
I don't mean he'd be good at being a dictator, being blessed with a natural talent for it. Just that he'd love a crack at it. And yes, of course, your friend has it right to stress he craves adulation. This is very clear. Which in and of itself, in a populist politician, is far from uncommon.
Look, this is not (for me) a left v right thing. I'm on the left. In America I would be a firm Democrat. But I tell you this without a shadow of a lie. If by some stretch of the imagination we picture a choice between "Dem Trump" - the same stupidity, the malevolence, the breathtaking narcissism, offering a programme of full blooded socialism - and "Generic Republican" (a Bush, say, or a Reagan), I would vote for the Republican and would not hesitate for one second in doing so.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
I disagree with that. Yes, Hillary perhaps could still have won, but she would have steamrollered any other Republican candidate, and Trump would have done the same to a generic Democratic candidate. It's a myth that they were both uniquely bad candidates.
What evidence is there for that? Look at the states that Hillary lost.
Michigan - Hillary got hundreds of thousands of fewer votes than Obama or John Kerry got. Trump' won this with fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost against Kerry.
Wisconsin - Trump got virtually an identical vote tally to Romney and again fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost the state. Problem is a quarter of the voters who had voted for Obama and John Kerry didn't vote for Hillary.
There's no evidence of some imagined Trump surge. Reality is that he won on a lower turnout by razor thin margins because hundreds of thousands in those states didn't turn out for Hillary who had turned out for John Kerry and Obama.
I find it amazing the EU thinks the UK is bluffing on this
Extension to transistion is not permitted in UK law and Barnier seems to ignore this notwithstanding Boris 80 seat majority
I do not want no deal but it is looking inevitable that on the 1st July the UK will terminate discussions and advise companies to prepare to trade under WTO
If this happens it will be a sad and disappointing end to our membership but the EU will have questions to face of their own
Its the UK who are bluffing surely. When we entered into this we understood the rules governing the working of the EU as we wrote most of them. That we then think said rules will not apply to the UK is the bluff - we don't need to have an external EU border apparently so can change our standards from the EU yet maintain an open border with the EU. Surprisingly enough the EU does think its long-standing rules apply and refuse to waive them for us.
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
I doubt that the EU particularly cares whether Britain is bluffing. It's simply too busy with other matters right now to engage seriously with such a short deadline unilaterally sought by its counterparty. Britain will need to make its own mind up whether it is bluffing.
But Trump is a symptom of how mainstream politicians have failed the people they were supposed to represent.
I think that may be largely true, in the pre-covid era.
Sadly many of the people who thought they were being failed by politicians are in the process of getting a fatal lesson in what failure really looks like...
One of the more disturbing things I saw recently was Michael Moore's recent film. It was a typically meandering, self indulgent piece supposedly about Trump but in fact the core of it was the poisoning of the population of Flint, Michigan, by interference with the water supply. It was shocking and Obama came out of it very, very badly. He came and he went and he achieved nothing. The American political class is genuinely not fit for purpose, corrupted through and through and indifferent to the lives of those it is meant to serve. I don't find it surprising that an absolute outsider like Trump proved popular and beat so many Senators, governors and insiders. He has proven to be even worse but Biden seems almost the ultimate insider, just as Hillary was.
We love to moan about our governments and rightly so but jeez, we thankfully have very little idea how bad it can be.
Is the President able to override a task that should be the responsibility of the State Government?
Would you be expecting the EU resolve healthcare issues in say Glasgow?
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
I disagree with that. Yes, Hillary perhaps could still have won, but she would have steamrollered any other Republican candidate, and Trump would have done the same to a generic Democratic candidate. It's a myth that they were both uniquely bad candidates.
What evidence is there for that? Look at the states that Hillary lost.
Michigan - Hillary got hundreds of thousands of fewer votes than Obama or John Kerry got. Trump' won this with fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost against Kerry.
Wisconsin - Trump got virtually an identical vote tally to Romney and again fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost the state. Problem is a quarter of the voters who had voted for Obama and John Kerry didn't vote for Hillary.
There's no evidence of some imagined Trump surge. Reality is that he won on a lower turnout by razor thin margins because hundreds of thousands in those states didn't turn out for Hillary who had turned out for John Kerry and Obama.
There was a reason that Bill Clinton resorted to punching the seats in his limo, in frustration, after a campaign update from Hillary.
Bill was a master at elective politics in the US context.
I doubt that the EU particularly cares whether Britain is bluffing. It's simply too busy with other matters right now to engage seriously with such a short deadline unilaterally sought by its counterparty. Britain will need to make its own mind up whether it is bluffing.
The UK government seems genuinely baffled that EU rules which the UK government claimed weren't being enforced properly (such as an external border) now exist and apply to us. From an EU perspective they must look at us and think "whatever". The whole world is heading for a crushing economic depression. The UK amputating itself from the free trade which will help it recover just allows France / Germany etc to recover slightly faster. "They want to sell us BMWs they will do what we want" they said. Great - except that the drop in sales to the UK by delays and tariffs is a minor inconvenience compared to the other pandemic effects.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
I think that is a key reason why Trump does actually do quite well. Certainly one of the reasons for me
Infantile
Why? As is seen on here, you mention you back someone that the left wing hates and it is not just a case of polite disagreement but downright name calling.
Much of the professional left-wing commentary these days reminds me of the Socrates quote in his trial "the most stupid people in the world are those who think they know anything and do not realise they know anything". They think they are right about everything and those who disagree are to be battered into submission , name called etc. It is a very unattractive trait.
Sorry, it should have said "do not realise they know nothing"!
Because liking someone because you think they wind people up that you dislike (and wanting "middle class leftists" trolled is hardly the heights of polite disagreement) might be an ok reason if you're talking about a stand-up comedian, but it's a pretty pathetic reason for a US president.
I think "middle class leftists" is tame compared with some of the vitriol thrown the other way.
To both you and Foxy, it is superficially stupid in one way but what is more stupid is to vote for a candidate / party that seems not only to not support what you believe in but to actively demonise what you think. Why should the WWC of the US go for the Democrats?
I heard of one CEO based out in San Francisco who stated that, if any of his staff voted for Trump, he would fire them. You think that is acceptable or is that ok because it's the Democrats and Democrats are "good" people.
Both sides have blinkered views. But what people don't like about many on the left is that they shove it down peoples' throats how wonderful people are on the left are as human beings and those on the right are borderline evil.
If you are going to cite a San Francisco CEO stating something like that you need to provide a source. If it is true it is not acceptable.
However nobody is going to accept that sort of story at face value given the lies and fake news that the American right pump out on a daily basis.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
That is a particularly stupid reason to elect someone to the most powerful office in the land. Democracy does however give morons equality of voting rights, with the sage and wise
Agreed 100%. Voting for Donald Trump is just like voting for Jeremy Corbyn.
Anyone with any basic decency should refuse to support either.
I find it amazing the EU thinks the UK is bluffing on this
Extension to transistion is not permitted in UK law and Barnier seems to ignore this notwithstanding Boris 80 seat majority
I do not want no deal but it is looking inevitable that on the 1st July the UK will terminate discussions and advise companies to prepare to trade under WTO
If this happens it will be a sad and disappointing end to our membership but the EU will have questions to face of their own
Its the UK who are bluffing surely. When we entered into this we understood the rules governing the working of the EU as we wrote most of them. That we then think said rules will not apply to the UK is the bluff - we don't need to have an external EU border apparently so can change our standards from the EU yet maintain an open border with the EU. Surprisingly enough the EU does think its long-standing rules apply and refuse to waive them for us.
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
Of course we can trade under WTO rules, we and virtually every other nation are WTO members
I find it amazing the EU thinks the UK is bluffing on this
Extension to transistion is not permitted in UK law and Barnier seems to ignore this notwithstanding Boris 80 seat majority
I do not want no deal but it is looking inevitable that on the 1st July the UK will terminate discussions and advise companies to prepare to trade under WTO
If this happens it will be a sad and disappointing end to our membership but the EU will have questions to face of their own
Its the UK who are bluffing surely. When we entered into this we understood the rules governing the working of the EU as we wrote most of them. That we then think said rules will not apply to the UK is the bluff - we don't need to have an external EU border apparently so can change our standards from the EU yet maintain an open border with the EU. Surprisingly enough the EU does think its long-standing rules apply and refuse to waive them for us.
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
I doubt that the EU particularly cares whether Britain is bluffing. It's simply too busy with other matters right now to engage seriously with such a short deadline unilaterally sought by its counterparty. Britain will need to make its own mind up whether it is bluffing.
Barnier is not the most tactful person but he was right that the UK wants what it claims is an ambitious deal with no concessions and in a tight timeframe. Only two of those three are possible. The UK government is in effect discarding 1 to retain 2 and 3. It prefers to do without any benefits if they mean compromising its red lines and the timescale. That is the choice our government is making, rightly or wrongly. That the government dresses up this choice, which is unlikely to be permanent anyway, as Harry and St George is ridiculous.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Yeah, that's all.
Part 1.
List of reserved matters
Reserved matters are subdivided into two categories: General reservations and specific reservations.
General reservations cover major issues which are always handled centrally by the Parliament in Westminster:[5]
the Crown the Union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland the making of peace or war defence treaties or any relations with foreign states or dominions naturalisation external trade quarantine navigation (including merchant shipping) submarine cables wireless telegraphy aerial navigation lighthouses currency copyright treason the UK Parliament registration and funding of political parties international development the Home Civil Service
Specific reservations cover particular areas of social and economic policy which are reserved to Westminster, listed under 11 'heads':[6]
data protection and access to information elections film classification immigration and nationality scientific procedures on live animals national security and counter-terrorism betting, gaming and lotteries emergency powers extradition lieutenancies charities
Head C – Trade and Industry
business associations insolvency competition intellectual property import and export control sea fishing outside the Scottish zone customer protection product standards, safety and liability weights and measures telecommunications postal services research councils
electricity oil and gas coal nuclear energy energy efficiency
Head E - Transport
marine transport air transport
Head F – Social Security
social security schemes child support pensions
Head G – Regulation of the Professions
architect health professions auditor
Head H – Employment
employment and industrial relations health and safety
Head J – Health and Medicines
xenotransplantation embryology, surrogacy and human genetics medicines, medical supplies and poisons welfare foods
Head K – Media and Culture
broadcasting public lending right
Head L – Justice
Legal services Legal aid Coroners Arbitration information rights mental capacity personal data public records public sector information Compensation for persons affected by crime and miscarriages of justice Prisons and offender management Family relationships and children Gender recognition Registration of births, deaths and places of worship
Head M – Land and Agricultural Assets
Registration of land Registration of agricultural charges and debentures Development and buildings
Head N – Miscellaneous
judicial salaries equal opportunities control of weapons of mass destruction Ordnance Survey Deep Sea mining time outer space Antarctica
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
I think that is a key reason why Trump does actually do quite well. Certainly one of the reasons for me
Infantile
Why? As is seen on here, you mention you back someone that the left wing hates and it is not just a case of polite disagreement but downright name calling.
Much of the professional left-wing commentary these days reminds me of the Socrates quote in his trial "the most stupid people in the world are those who think they know anything and do not realise they know anything". They think they are right about everything and those who disagree are to be battered into submission , name called etc. It is a very unattractive trait.
Sorry, it should have said "do not realise they know nothing"!
Because liking someone because you think they wind people up that you dislike (and wanting "middle class leftists" trolled is hardly the heights of polite disagreement) might be an ok reason if you're talking about a stand-up comedian, but it's a pretty pathetic reason for a US president.
I think "middle class leftists" is tame compared with some of the vitriol thrown the other way.
To both you and Foxy, it is superficially stupid in one way but what is more stupid is to vote for a candidate / party that seems not only to not support what you believe in but to actively demonise what you think. Why should the WWC of the US go for the Democrats?
I heard of one CEO based out in San Francisco who stated that, if any of his staff voted for Trump, he would fire them. You think that is acceptable or is that ok because it's the Democrats and Democrats are "good" people.
Both sides have blinkered views. But what people don't like about many on the left is that they shove it down peoples' throats how wonderful people are on the left are as human beings and those on the right are borderline evil.
Well, if what you heard actually happened in San Francisco, then of course it's not acceptable. I don't know about the laws in the US or California, but for sure it's not the Republican party who would try to ensure that CEOs aren't legally able to fire people like that. So I guess if you find that kind of behaviour unacceptable you know which party not to vote for.
Please can you tell me when I have ever said the Democrats are good people. Please don't put words into my mouth.
And you are the one who started approving of things being "shoved down peoples' throats" by saying you like Trump because he annoys people you disagree with, not me.
Hypocrite.
Kamski, read my words - I said many on the left, not you. Hillary Clinton called 50%+ of Trump's voters "deplorable". You think that is acceptable?
As for my personal views, I think putting a smiley face after my original comment might suggest I am not being 100% serious but hey ho...
HRC was spot on with that. It was one of the great speeches. But you are also right to say it was unacceptable. Politicians must not diss the voters. When people say they want their politicians to "tell it like it is", they are lying. They don't. That is the last thing they want. So she screwed up there. It cost her.
He is still firmly anti Brexit, he is no Tory just wants to follow what Denmark and New Zealand are doing and reopen schools
I would also like to see the UK do what Denmark and New Zealand are doing which is to first get the virus under control and only then open schools. New cases yesterday: UK 3,446, Denmark 46, NZ 0.
The reality is you need to be either in or work closely with one of the big blocks in the world. For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU. Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
I think in part this splintered approach to the lockdown is a natural consequence of devolution - after all, if everybody always does the same thing and fails to take account of local conditions, then what's the point of it? But also there are political imperatives at work - as you say, they have to show everybody that they're in charge. In Wales this is because we're Labour and we don't take orders from the evil Tories. In Scotland this is because we want independence and to be rid of the evil Tories. In Northern Ireland this is because our Government is a two-headed snake and the heads are too busy trying to bite each other for the body to move very far.
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Westminster is obviously not the English Parliament because it still contains 117 members who aren't elected in England.
Conversely, why the situation should still prevail in which these other countries require large areas of policy to be decided by an assembly consisting mainly of English people, goodness only knows.
We must remember that (with all the usual caveats around Northern Ireland,) the UK is a union of nations and not one of regions like most properly constituted federations (the US, Canada, Australia, Germany etc.) And it's one that's outlived its usefulness.
What conceivable value the Union with Scotland, for example, holds for the English people is never adequately articulated. The only obvious answers anybody can come up with are 'we need somewhere to put our ballistic missile submarines' and 'we might have to give up our UN Security Council seat otherwise,' and these are matters of no importance to almost the entire general population of the country - who are mostly interested in getting on with their lives in peace and, to the extent that politics troubles them at all, are primarily concerned with resolving England's many internal problems.
All of the conditions that promoted the creation of the United Kingdom and necessitated its continuity have been removed. It should be euthanized compassionately and given a decent burial.
I find it amazing the EU thinks the UK is bluffing on this
Extension to transistion is not permitted in UK law and Barnier seems to ignore this notwithstanding Boris 80 seat majority
I do not want no deal but it is looking inevitable that on the 1st July the UK will terminate discussions and advise companies to prepare to trade under WTO
If this happens it will be a sad and disappointing end to our membership but the EU will have questions to face of their own
Its the UK who are bluffing surely. When we entered into this we understood the rules governing the working of the EU as we wrote most of them. That we then think said rules will not apply to the UK is the bluff - we don't need to have an external EU border apparently so can change our standards from the EU yet maintain an open border with the EU. Surprisingly enough the EU does think its long-standing rules apply and refuse to waive them for us.
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
Of course we can trade under WTO rules, we and virtually every other nation are WTO members
Oh sure. But when the head of the WTO thinks our plan won't work and that GATT24 which keeps being quoted to protect us from crippling tariffs simply doesn't apply then again I ask at which point morons pay attention.
People trade under WTO. Paying vast tariffs. Never has any country torn up every single trade agreement to trade under WTO in preference to free trade. There's a reason why...
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
It was the most hated presidential candidate ever vs the second most hated presidential candidate ever, and the most hated won by a whisker.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
Its worth remembering though that many GOP voters genuinely hated Hillary (and had done for decades) and were afraid she would win. So they voted.
But many Democrat voters belittled Trump, thought he was a pathetic joke and was going to lose heavily - and in the Midwest Hillary declined to campaign. So they didn't vote.
Hillary didn't take her campaign seriously. The Democrats didn't take Trump seriously. The Democrats lost the election, Trump didn't win it.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Yeah, that's all.
Part 1.
List of reserved matters
Reserved matters are subdivided into two categories: General reservations and specific reservations.
General reservations cover major issues which are always handled centrally by the Parliament in Westminster:[5]
the Crown the Union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland the making of peace or war defence treaties or any relations with foreign states or dominions naturalisation external trade quarantine navigation (including merchant shipping) submarine cables wireless telegraphy aerial navigation lighthouses currency copyright treason the UK Parliament registration and funding of political parties international development the Home Civil Service
Specific reservations cover particular areas of social and economic policy which are reserved to Westminster, listed under 11 'heads':[6]
data protection and access to information elections film classification immigration and nationality scientific procedures on live animals national security and counter-terrorism betting, gaming and lotteries emergency powers extradition lieutenancies charities
Head C – Trade and Industry
business associations insolvency competition intellectual property import and export control sea fishing outside the Scottish zone customer protection product standards, safety and liability weights and measures telecommunications postal services research councils
So as I said the vast majority of health, education, welfare, housing, transport, police, social care policy etc is devolved to Holyrood.
Scotland also has its own criminal and civil legal system
But Trump is a symptom of how mainstream politicians have failed the people they were supposed to represent.
I think that may be largely true, in the pre-covid era.
Sadly many of the people who thought they were being failed by politicians are in the process of getting a fatal lesson in what failure really looks like...
One of the more disturbing things I saw recently was Michael Moore's recent film. It was a typically meandering, self indulgent piece supposedly about Trump but in fact the core of it was the poisoning of the population of Flint, Michigan, by interference with the water supply. It was shocking and Obama came out of it very, very badly. He came and he went and he achieved nothing. The American political class is genuinely not fit for purpose, corrupted through and through and indifferent to the lives of those it is meant to serve. I don't find it surprising that an absolute outsider like Trump proved popular and beat so many Senators, governors and insiders. He has proven to be even worse but Biden seems almost the ultimate insider, just as Hillary was.
We love to moan about our governments and rightly so but jeez, we thankfully have very little idea how bad it can be.
Is the President able to override a task that should be the responsibility of the State Government?
Would you be expecting the EU resolve healthcare issues in say Glasgow?
The State government was the problem due to corruption and yes Federal agencies did have a roll to play in water quality so I suppose the equivalent would be where the EU had concurrent competence. Its worth a watch.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
It was the most hated presidential candidate ever vs the second most hated presidential candidate ever, and the most hated won by a whisker.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
Its worth remembering though that many GOP voters genuinely hated Hillary (and had done for decades) and were afraid she would win. So they voted.
But many Democrat voters belittled Trump, thought he was a pathetic joke and was going to lose heavily - and in the Midwest Hillary declined to campaign. So they didn't vote.
Hillary didn't take her campaign seriously. The Democrats didn't take Trump seriously. The Democrats lost the election, Trump didn't win it.
She also managed to lose a chunk of the left (who stayed home) over her support for expanding and continuing various armed conflicts America was involved in.
The point where she wanted enforce a no-fly zone over Syria - including Russian military aircraft - was..... interesting.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
If someone wants to burn a Union Flag or Cross of St George or Saltire or anything else for that matter [so long as it belongs to them and they do it safely and its not arson] that should be their right to make a peaceful protest.
He is still firmly anti Brexit, he is no Tory just wants to follow what Denmark and New Zealand are doing and reopen schools
I would also like to see the UK do what Denmark and New Zealand are doing which is to first get the virus under control and only then open schools. New cases yesterday: UK 3,446, Denmark 46, NZ 0.
Italy is not reopening schools until September so may be best to follow suit as our death rate is closer to theirs
Why would the likes of Watford, Bournemouth, Southampton, Leicester etc possibly vote for this. At a stretch they could get 6 votes out of 20, they need 14. Straight to the Prem is therefore a non runner.
Joining League 2 is possible, the football league would benefit massively from their brands, but the path to the prem is long and uncertain, even League 1 isnt trivial to get out as the likes of Man City, Sunderland, Leeds, Forest have found, and the Champ is a bit of a lottery with so many clubs on parachute payments making historic size of club less important than recently getting Prem money.
At least if they started in league 2 they would be used to the standard of opposition they would be playing.
Isn't it obvious that they are both just running scared of Dundee United returning to the Premiership next season?
it's not that expensive to hose down and disinfect the away end after the arabs have paid a visit........
Dens Park has hoses? And disinfectant? At least they can safely put them away for another year.
will still need them for the hertz fans...... whenever the league kicks off again.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
It was the most hated presidential candidate ever vs the second most hated presidential candidate ever, and the most hated won by a whisker.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
Its worth remembering though that many GOP voters genuinely hated Hillary (and had done for decades) and were afraid she would win. So they voted.
But many Democrat voters belittled Trump, thought he was a pathetic joke and was going to lose heavily - and in the Midwest Hillary declined to campaign. So they didn't vote.
Hillary didn't take her campaign seriously. The Democrats didn't take Trump seriously. The Democrats lost the election, Trump didn't win it.
She also managed to lose a chunk of the left (who stayed home) over her support for expanding and continuing various armed conflicts America was involved in.
The point where she wanted enforce a no-fly zone over Syria - including Russian military aircraft - was..... interesting.
She would have been the worst President since Carter at the very least if she'd been elected.
Instead she threw away the election to the worst President ever [except maybe Andrew Jackson]
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
All Republican candidates are demonised and then, in later years, when it suits the Democrats, they then get lauded as "principled" and the "right" sort of Republican. Happened with Reagan, GW Bush and Romney, and even McCain.
Trump is one of a kind so I see less chance of it here. But I would disagree he has made things more dangerous and others are more to blame. Even Condolezza Rice said the biggest mistake was to let China into the WTO.
The sort of republican they like is the sort who plays the game by their rules on their pitch. Who uses their language and their commonly accepted principles to address the issues of the day.
Trump does none of those things. That is why they find him so intensely annoying.
Exactly. The Kavanaugh nomination was a classic example - any other Republican leader would have rolled over. Trump rolled up his sleeves and fought back.
Yeah he fought like a lion to get his misogynist drunk of choice onto the Court.
And as a result, he will be able to block the policies of left-wing presidents many decades into the future. Voters with an eye on the main prize appreciate that dedication to winning in reality, not in argument or morality.
It is not difficult to select a judge when the choice is for you to make. Or to prop an economy up with huge deficit spending. Or to get tax cuts for the wealthy through a Republican congress. Or to hold reality TV meetings with sundry oddballs and dictators. But, sure, he's managed those things.
It's hard to over-emphasise the utterly disastrous impact keeping kids out of school for the best part of half a year will have on their future prospects. Many will never re-engage again.
Many teachers are great, but, overall, I'm sorry to say that schooling is a prime example of "producer capture". The fact that a former Labour minister is moved to say what he's said is very alarming.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
The US is our biggest export destination, we need a trade deal with them post Brexit and Trump is more likely to do that with the UK ahead of the EU than Biden is.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
That is a particularly stupid reason to elect someone to the most powerful office in the land. Democracy does however give morons equality of voting rights, with the sage and wise
When millions of voters are dismissed and talked down to like this, it is surely a perfectly good reason.
?
Trump voter: "I'm going to vote for a malevolent arse because you won't like it" Foxy: "That would make you an idiot" Trump voter: "You see, it was a good reason"
I'm not sure what you've been drinking, but even with lockdown you do realise we're a long time from the lagershed aren't you?
Hillary Clinton was a notably poor candidate. Even in the Democratic primaries she lost to a previously barely heard of unknown Senator, then nearly lost to a geriatric socialist no-hoper Senator too. She inspired no love in the Democrat side and was hated by the Republicans. Plus by the law of 'buggins turn' it was historically the GOPs turn to win the White House anyway.
Any smart Republican would have had a great chance versus her to regain the Oval Office for their party.
What on earth has that got to do with anything I wrote? Perhaps you are the one who is blind drunk.
To spell it out for you, I am agreeing with Foxy that voting for an idiot because they annoy people you don't like is a stupid reason AND saying it is a stupid reason does not provide any kind of additional justification for voting for said idiot.
The reality is you need to be either in or work closely with one of the big blocks in the world. For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU. Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
Why? Why is that reality?
Many successful free trading nations work seek to trade and work with many blocs while not being in any.
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
It was the most hated presidential candidate ever vs the second most hated presidential candidate ever, and the most hated won by a whisker.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
Its worth remembering though that many GOP voters genuinely hated Hillary (and had done for decades) and were afraid she would win. So they voted.
But many Democrat voters belittled Trump, thought he was a pathetic joke and was going to lose heavily - and in the Midwest Hillary declined to campaign. So they didn't vote.
Hillary didn't take her campaign seriously. The Democrats didn't take Trump seriously. The Democrats lost the election, Trump didn't win it.
She also managed to lose a chunk of the left (who stayed home) over her support for expanding and continuing various armed conflicts America was involved in.
The point where she wanted enforce a no-fly zone over Syria - including Russian military aircraft - was..... interesting.
She would have been the worst President since Carter at the very least if she'd been elected.
Instead she threw away the election to the worst President ever [except maybe Andrew Jackson]
Andrew "Indian removal" Jackson was a moral titan compared to Trump
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
The US is our biggest export destination, we need a trade deal with them post Brexit and Trump is more likely to do that with the UK ahead of the EU than Biden is.
The WTO will still exist Trump or no Trump
The WTO existing does not help weaker countries in a dispute with a strong country or bloc.
It needs judges to make decisions and countries to respect and uphold those decisions.
The USA has rarely done the latter, but at least didnt use to stop the former.
Whatever the WTO rules say powerful countries will do as they please, and the UK will be in shock, saying but the rules say we should be doing it our way. Just as we have done with the EU, continually surprised some countries dont follow the rules whilst we try to.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
I think in part this splintered approach to the lockdown is a natural consequence of devolution - after all, if everybody always does the same thing and fails to take account of local conditions, then what's the point of it? But also there are political imperatives at work - as you say, they have to show everybody that they're in charge. In Wales this is because we're Labour and we don't take orders from the evil Tories. In Scotland this is because we want independence and to be rid of the evil Tories. In Northern Ireland this is because our Government is a two-headed snake and the heads are too busy trying to bite each other for the body to move very far.
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Westminster is obviously not the English Parliament because it still contains 117 members who aren't elected in England.
Conversely, why the situation should still prevail in which these other countries require large areas of policy to be decided by an assembly consisting mainly of English people, goodness only knows.
We must remember that (with all the usual caveats around Northern Ireland,) the UK is a union of nations and not one of regions like most properly constituted federations (the US, Canada, Australia, Germany etc.) And it's one that's outlived its usefulness.
What conceivable value the Union with Scotland, for example, holds for the English people is never adequately articulated. The only obvious answers anybody can come up with are 'we need somewhere to put our ballistic missile submarines' and 'we might have to give up our UN Security Council seat otherwise,' and these are matters of no importance to almost the entire general population of the country - who are mostly interested in getting on with their lives in peace and, to the extent that politics troubles them at all, are primarily concerned with resolving England's many internal problems.
All of the conditions that promoted the creation of the United Kingdom and necessitated its continuity have been removed. It should be euthanized compassionately and given a decent burial.
Rubbish, the UK is now effectively a Federal nation and Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland are basically regions of the UK, none have been independent nations for centuries.
Bavaria was once an independent country, that does not stop it now being a region of a Federal Germany.
Scotland also has plenty of oil and renewable energy, a thriving financial sector and whisky industry and some excellent universities and regiments as well as holding Trident. It contributes a great deal to the UK
I think the greatest myth in modern US politics is that Trump won some great victory unique to him in 2016. I don't believe it for a second. I believe Hillary lost in 2016 more than Trump won. Hillary ignored the midwest, deliberately refused to campaign there and by razor-thin margins lost enough seats to hand Trump victory - often on a depressed turnout.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
I disagree with that. Yes, Hillary perhaps could still have won, but she would have steamrollered any other Republican candidate, and Trump would have done the same to a generic Democratic candidate. It's a myth that they were both uniquely bad candidates.
Hillary's campaign manager must have been a closet Republican. The way the campaign was managed was dreadful.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
All Republican candidates are demonised and then, in later years, when it suits the Democrats, they then get lauded as "principled" and the "right" sort of Republican. Happened with Reagan, GW Bush and Romney, and even McCain.
Trump is one of a kind so I see less chance of it here. But I would disagree he has made things more dangerous and others are more to blame. Even Condolezza Rice said the biggest mistake was to let China into the WTO.
The sort of republican they like is the sort who plays the game by their rules on their pitch. Who uses their language and their commonly accepted principles to address the issues of the day.
Trump does none of those things. That is why they find him so intensely annoying.
Exactly. The Kavanaugh nomination was a classic example - any other Republican leader would have rolled over. Trump rolled up his sleeves and fought back.
Yeah he fought like a lion to get his misogynist drunk of choice onto the Court.
Why was Kavanaugh a misogynist? Christine Blasey Ford couldn't remember basic details of what happened and claimed she was scared of flying to give herself more time for her case until it was pointed out all her pictures on Facebook of taking air travel for holidays.
She was quite clearly telling the truth. He was all bluster and dissembling.
You really are coming over as irredeemably biased now. C'mon. Get a grip.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
The US is our biggest export destination, we need a trade deal with them post Brexit and Trump is more likely to do that with the UK ahead of the EU than Biden is.
The WTO will still exist Trump or no Trump
The WTO existing does not help weaker countries in a dispute with a strong country or bloc.
It needs judges to make decisions and countries to respect and uphold those decisions.
The USA has rarely done the latter, but at least didnt use to stop the former.
Whatever the WTO rules say powerful countries will do as they please, and the UK will be in shock, saying but the rules say we should be doing it our way. Just as we have done with the EU, continually surprised some countries dont follow the rules whilst we try to.
If Trump loses, then we will still be on WTO terms anyway under Boris from next year with the EU but with zero chance of a trade deal with the US, Biden and the Democrats will ignore us and focus on a trade deal with the EU.
We need a trade deal with the US, our biggest export destination and the most powerful nation we need to align with post Brexit to make it sustainable if we are to leave the EU and single market
SNP MP arrested and charged over a dispute about a flag. Sturgeon breaks her own Stay Home message by visiting her hairdresser to get hair dye 30,000 test results are missing going back to mid-April. No wonder infection rate is so high.
Shambolic. But Little Scotlanders still have confidence.
Don't worry - no risk of deaths by falling Yukka tree at garden centres or being hit by a golf ball in Scotland today.
You can always rely On Big Englander turning up at the whiff of a mention SNP or Scotland, always ready to praise either to the heavens regardless of bias.
Very rare that I agree with Fraser Nelson these days but I think we are going to have to try some sort of regional controls here. Even in Scotland if you are not in a care home the risk of CV seems pretty minimal outside greater Glasgow. That might not always be the case but there are a lot of people isolated from family and friends, struggling with depression and the multiple side effects of that or in need of treatment for unrelated conditions who are being locked down and are at minimal risk. And there are some who want to go back to work too. People whose wages are not being paid by the State in the main.
Unfortunately there is a conflict of interest in the population.
Those working for the public sector (like me) with a guaranteed income and pension are, relatively, content with the lockdown and have no problem with it being extended. Why should we? Safety first and all that. Scotland, of course, has a huge host of comfortably-off middle-class white collar public sector workers who dominate the political system.
My thoughts are with the poor blighters who are in the private sector, are self-employed, who run small businesses, and have mortgages to pay. This situation must seem horrific to them. No-one is clapping for them at 8pm on a Thursday. But I suspect their interests will simply be ignored by the priviligentsia.
Interesting how this same issue is presented in differing ways depending on political outlook. For the right - cossetted public sector vs exposed private sector. For the left - privileged middle class professionals vs the exploited working class.
Either way the private sector working class are being hit hardest at the moment and the public sector middle class surviving best economically the impact of the lockdown
Funnily enough, from my experience, the biggest supporters of a draconian, as long as it takes lockdown have been middle class public sector professionals whose wages and pensions are not impacted currently by the crisis
Ps I have also found them the worst for not paying their cleaners, dog walkers etc during the crisis as well
Really? Or are you making shit up to support the softhead prejudice that one expects from a Trump fanboy?
No, I'm not. My wife and I were laid off. We took a conscious decision we would pay our dogwalker because she is stretched for cash and needs the income. Two of her clients whom we all know, who all have kept their jobs and WFH, and incomes remain unchanged and signal virtue at every opportunity didn't. The dogwalker is stressing out.
Ps Grow up. Just because somebody has a point of view you disagree with doesn't make them a "Trump fanboy"
Aren't you virtue signalling over your benevolence to your dogwalker?
Can you say who you would prefer to win WH2020? Please show your workings.
Not really. I didn't say upfront we were paying, only when challenged. Kinablu asked for information so I answered.
On who would prefer to win the WH, Trump over Biden. I think Trump personally is an absolutely a*se as a human being. But his analysis on China has been right strategically and I think for the coming problems, it is better to have him than Biden.
Ps at the risk of being seen to virtue signal (again), I did say a few threads back that, even though I am a Conservative, I did think the closing of the mines in the 1980s was wrong as it destroyed the communities. Voting one way doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.
Interesting to have a few Trump supporters like you here, ensures all views are heard
Mmm.
Given this is a betting site, always good to have a diversity of opinion to help improve your chances of winning
I agree with that. You stick around. But I cannot understand how somebody of intelligence can be sanguine about another 4 years of this malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House.
I think the clue to you, as so often, is in language. You use the word "arse" to describe him. He's an arse as a person. A bit of an arse. A total arse. Whatever. This is a classic tell. I hear it a lot from people about Trump - always from those who do not see him as the global menace he palpably is. "He's an arse" is invariably followed with a "but" and then comes the apologia.
Well, there is no but, because he is NOT an "arse" - as a person or otherwise. What he is is the malevolent, vacuous, hate-monging troll in the White House. But not, IMO, for much longer.
Thing is, many voters want middle class leftists trolled. THey don't particularly like Trump, but he annoys the heck out of people they like much less.
That is a particularly stupid reason to elect someone to the most powerful office in the land. Democracy does however give morons equality of voting rights, with the sage and wise
When millions of voters are dismissed and talked down to like this, it is surely a perfectly good reason.
?
Trump voter: "I'm going to vote for a malevolent arse because you won't like it" Foxy: "That would make you an idiot" Trump voter: "You see, it was a good reason"
I'm not sure what you've been drinking, but even with lockdown you do realise we're a long time from the lagershed aren't you?
Hillary Clinton was a notably poor candidate. Even in the Democratic primaries she lost to a previously barely heard of unknown Senator, then nearly lost to a geriatric socialist no-hoper Senator too. She inspired no love in the Democrat side and was hated by the Republicans. Plus by the law of 'buggins turn' it was historically the GOPs turn to win the White House anyway.
Any smart Republican would have had a great chance versus her to regain the Oval Office for their party.
What on earth has that got to do with anything I wrote? Perhaps you are the one who is blind drunk.
To spell it out for you, I am agreeing with Foxy that voting for an idiot because they annoy people you don't like is a stupid reason AND saying it is a stupid reason does not provide any kind of additional justification for voting for said idiot.
My apologies. Absolutely nothing, its got nothing to do with what you wrote sorry. I don't know what's happened with the quotations there, if I clicked quote on the wrong post or if my browser cache or vanilla screwed up, but either way I didn't notice the wrong post was quoted sorry.
That reply was aimed at @contrarian not you who wrote this:
Agreed 100%. Voting for Donald Trump is just like voting for Jeremy Corbyn.
Anyone with any basic decency should refuse to support either.
But that's what the democrats want in a republican. Someone with ''basic decency'' Such a republican would have been beaten hollow by Hilary Clinton, who has essentially cornered the market in ''basic decency''. Her book could really have been entitled ''basic decency''
It's hard to over-emphasise the utterly disastrous impact keeping kids out of school for the best part of half a year will have on their future prospects. Many will never re-engage again.
Many teachers are great, but, overall, I'm sorry to say that schooling is a prime example of "producer capture". The fact that a former Labour minister is moved to say what he's said is very alarming.
There was a cohort, admittedly small, but it existed, of children who were functionally illiterate as a result of WWII evacuation, and consequent changes of schools. Generally, AIUI, it was children who were moved two or three times.
The reality is you need to be either in or work closely with one of the big blocks in the world. For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU. Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
Why? Why is that reality?
Many successful free trading nations work seek to trade and work with many blocs while not being in any.
Japan, S Korea, Australia, then struggling and those are all in their own free trade area with other asian countries so essentially a minor bloc.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
The US is our biggest export destination, we need a trade deal with them post Brexit and Trump is more likely to do that with the UK ahead of the EU than Biden is.
The WTO will still exist Trump or no Trump
The WTO existing does not help weaker countries in a dispute with a strong country or bloc.
It needs judges to make decisions and countries to respect and uphold those decisions.
The USA has rarely done the latter, but at least didnt use to stop the former.
Whatever the WTO rules say powerful countries will do as they please, and the UK will be in shock, saying but the rules say we should be doing it our way. Just as we have done with the EU, continually surprised some countries dont follow the rules whilst we try to.
If Trump loses, then we will still be on WTO terms anyway under Boris from next year with the EU but with zero chance of a trade deal with the US, Biden and the Democrats will ignore us and focus on a trade deal with the EU.
We need a trade deal with the US, our biggest export destination and the most powerful nation we need to align with post Brexit to make it sustainable if we are to leave the EU and single market
No we don't.
A trade deal will be great if and when we can get one, but we do not need to align with anyone. We didn't leave one union to become lapdog of another.
Despite beings its most high profile foreign supporter, Trump is a huge barrier to the chances of Brexit becoming a success. If he loses, Brexit does have some cards to try and play, if he wins again, we have nowhere to go.
If Trump loses there is zero chance of a trade deal, Biden and the Democrats will prioritise a trade deal with the EU over the UK
I am not talking about a trade deal, that is not happening for various reasons regardless of who is in power.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
The US is our biggest export destination, we need a trade deal with them post Brexit and Trump is more likely to do that with the UK ahead of the EU than Biden is.
The WTO will still exist Trump or no Trump
The WTO existing does not help weaker countries in a dispute with a strong country or bloc.
It needs judges to make decisions and countries to respect and uphold those decisions.
The USA has rarely done the latter, but at least didnt use to stop the former.
Whatever the WTO rules say powerful countries will do as they please, and the UK will be in shock, saying but the rules say we should be doing it our way. Just as we have done with the EU, continually surprised some countries dont follow the rules whilst we try to.
If Trump loses, then we will still be on WTO terms anyway under Boris from next year with the EU but with zero chance of a trade deal with the US, Biden and the Democrats will ignore us and focus on a trade deal with the EU.
We need a trade deal with the US, our biggest export destination and the most powerful nation we need to align with post Brexit to make it sustainable if we are to leave the EU and single market
If we need one we are f***ed because it aint happening. At a minimum you would need the Republicans to win back the house, and hold that and the senate for 4 years. And the UK parliament to surrender on food safety and healthcare provision. None of those things are happening on their own, let alone the magical acca.
If your thoughts are representative of your parties then there really isnt much hope.
The reality is you need to be either in or work closely with one of the big blocks in the world. For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU. Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
Why? Why is that reality?
Many successful free trading nations work seek to trade and work with many blocs while not being in any.
Japan, S Korea, Australia, then struggling and those are all in their own free trade area with other asian countries so essentially a minor bloc.
And Singapore, but their trade bloc is quite minor in comparison and Japan has suggested the UK could join the TPP post-Brexit which considering its a trade deal not a political bloc I'd be quite happy with.
"It comes as Drakeford publishes the lockdown exit plan for Wales, setting out a traffic light system for progressive easing of restrictions on education, social life and business."
Its all a bit silly isn't it. We can't have the UK government 5 level system, we have to show everybody we have control and power, so we will use a traffic light system instead.
I think in part this splintered approach to the lockdown is a natural consequence of devolution - after all, if everybody always does the same thing and fails to take account of local conditions, then what's the point of it? But also there are political imperatives at work - as you say, they have to show everybody that they're in charge. In Wales this is because we're Labour and we don't take orders from the evil Tories. In Scotland this is because we want independence and to be rid of the evil Tories. In Northern Ireland this is because our Government is a two-headed snake and the heads are too busy trying to bite each other for the body to move very far.
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
No, there is nothing wrong with devolved governments taking a slightly different approach while maintaining the Union.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Westminster is obviously not the English Parliament because it still contains 117 members who aren't elected in England.
Conversely, why the situation should still prevail in which these other countries require large areas of policy to be decided by an assembly consisting mainly of English people, goodness only knows.
We must remember that (with all the usual caveats around Northern Ireland,) the UK is a union of nations and not one of regions like most properly constituted federations (the US, Canada, Australia, Germany etc.) And it's one that's outlived its usefulness.
What conceivable value the Union with Scotland, for example, holds for the English people is never adequately articulated. The only obvious answers anybody can come up with are 'we need somewhere to put our ballistic missile submarines' and 'we might have to give up our UN Security Council seat otherwise,' and these are matters of no importance to almost the entire general population of the country - who are mostly interested in getting on with their lives in peace and, to the extent that politics troubles them at all, are primarily concerned with resolving England's many internal problems.
All of the conditions that promoted the creation of the United Kingdom and necessitated its continuity have been removed. It should be euthanized compassionately and given a decent burial.
Rubbish, the UK is now effectively a Federal nation and Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland are basically regions of the UK, none have been independent nations for centuries.
Bavaria was once an independent country, that does not stop it now being a region of a Federal Germany.
Scotland also has plenty of oil and renewable energy, a thriving financial sector and whisky industry and some excellent universities and regiments as well as holding Trident. It contributes a great deal to the UK
The devolved assemblies have no constitutional right to exist and the English don't get one, so we have this dog's breakfast arrangement of the UK Government and Parliament trying to do two jobs at the same time. Apart from that the UK is a model federation.
Scotland is a necessary element of the UK, but this is an entirely separate issue to that of whether or not the UK is necessary to Scotland, or its other constituent parts.
Literally what did they expect, a 3 month tender process? Careful analysis of each companies diversity policies and commitments to paying living wages etc?
We asked a load of vulnerable people to lock themselves a way, things like getting food to them required instant action and it did.
Why would the likes of Watford, Bournemouth, Southampton, Leicester etc possibly vote for this. At a stretch they could get 6 votes out of 20, they need 14. Straight to the Prem is therefore a non runner.
Joining League 2 is possible, the football league would benefit massively from their brands, but the path to the prem is long and uncertain, even League 1 isnt trivial to get out as the likes of Man City, Sunderland, Leeds, Forest have found, and the Champ is a bit of a lottery with so many clubs on parachute payments making historic size of club less important than recently getting Prem money.
At least if they started in league 2 they would be used to the standard of opposition they would be playing.
With 50K+ supporters every game , only limited by number of seats,there is absolutely no chance they would join a diddy English league. Far better to have a Northern Europe league of similar sized countries.
The UK agreed to level playing field provisions in the political declaration.
It’s there in black and white .
There are standard level playing field provisions in CEFTA deal that Canada and the EU agreed. The UK wants those level playing field provisions applied.
The EU wants unprecedented ones agreed.
What the UK wants has precedence and is there in black and white.
Rubbish, the UK is now effectively a Federal nation and Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland are basically regions of the UK, none have been independent nations for centuries.
Always interesting to encounter the psychological barrier some Englanders have for including their own country in their regionalisation of the UK.
How many centuries has it been since England was an independent nation?
Neither side wants a deal enough to do one. We would all be much better off accepting that and getting on with preparing for the consequences.
There's a lot of truth in that. The EU has higher priorities and the self-radicalisation conveyor belt of Leavers has not been halted by Covid-19.
We have been promised a golden tomorrow. It's time to deliver.
Between Covid 19 and Brexit, the forthcoming recession is going to be a sight to behold.
It's going to be quite a thing to live through. But we've been promised that we'll be better off not extending the transition and clearly the government will have to deliver on that, so however bad it is here we can expect it to be much worse in the EU27.
At the moment I would predict a much worse outcome for the EU, mainly because of Germany's absolute opposition to QE or even the buying of government bonds by the ECB as shown by the current impasse. This means that the response to the crisis is going to be almost entirely fiscal rather than a combination of fiscal and monetary policy such as we will have here. Large scale fiscal injections are possible for countries like Germany who can borrow at negative interest rates but will be very difficult for countries like Italy and Spain with the result that there will be much greater unemployment and business collapse in the latter countries.
This will, of course, do the UK no good whatsoever depressing exports and possibly making the trade agreement more problematic. The EU are going to face internal stresses and strains that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park. State aid is going to be another pressure point as France is already showing.
There is not going to be any kind of meaningful trade agreement. What will do for Spain is the collapse of the tourist industry. Italy is where it is all really going to kick off. I do agree that the EU is going to be tested as an institution like never before.
Well, we'll see. I cleave to the idea that neither side would ultimately be so stupid as to not have a free trade agreement but I confess the evidence for such stupidity is mounting.
It's a given that a deal in December, if any, won't amount to anything much. The UK government doesn't have the ambition and the EU doesn't have the interest and neither party has the time. Eventually - perhaps many years and much wasting of energy later - a deal will be sorted out, I am fairly sure. It will be a rule taking relationship on the EU's terms.
What is particularly stupid is this tinpot government of ours fetishising No Deal as a diversion from troubles at home.
This is a long way from an impartial view based on an unwillingness to reconcile yourself to either the referendum decision or the endorsement of that decision by the 2019 GE. There is plainly a risk that both sides will be distracted by the far more important things we each have on our plates at the present time with the result the deal will be less wide ranging than it might have been. This is unfortunate and it is equally so that the shortage of time has not prevented both sides, and the EU in particular, from wishing to adopt macho posturing in respect of the discussions.
No FTA has been Tory game plan all along, they are deluded halfwits.
The study, which involved more than 60,000 people, revealed that around 5% of the population - some two million people - has had the coronavirus. It also showed that 33% of those who had caught the virus had not shown any symptoms.
I didn't catch this bit to start with. I don't think this is great news though, very low number of people have had it, a significant percentage with no symptoms, but still total carnage.
The reality is you need to be either in or work closely with one of the big blocks in the world. For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU. Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
Why? Why is that reality?
Many successful free trading nations work seek to trade and work with many blocs while not being in any.
Japan, S Korea, Australia, then struggling and those are all in their own free trade area with other asian countries so essentially a minor bloc.
And Singapore, but their trade bloc is quite minor in comparison and Japan has suggested the UK could join the TPP post-Brexit which considering its a trade deal not a political bloc I'd be quite happy with.
So not many countries then? One twice our size, one mineral rich, just one similar nation - all in the same bloc adhering to rules - a bit like the old EEC if not the EU - and one city state.
The UK agreed to level playing field provisions in the political declaration.
It’s there in black and white .
There are standard level playing field provisions in CEFTA deal that Canada and the EU agreed. The UK wants those level playing field provisions applied.
The EU wants unprecedented ones agreed.
What the UK wants has precedence and is there in black and white.
The UK wants nothing enforceable but just that to be taken on trust so it’s worthless. Why would the EU agree to that .
Comments
If the govt really want no deal, and for it to be resolved by the end of this parliament, which year is your preferred year?
In 2008 I bet on (and supported) Obama but would have been OK with either side winning. Same in 2012 I'd have been happy with either side winning. In 2016 I would have wanted both sides to lose, but Trump was so manifestly awful that Hillary being merely bad put her miles ahead of Trump.
Any active Trump supporter anywhere in Europe is likely to get a lot of flak but I agree that it doesn't need to be either personal or abusive.
The GOP won in 2016 despite Trump not because of him.
In a sane world, all the Dems would need to do is keep replaying the Trump "bleach" clip over and over again until people get the message.
The trouble is it isn't a sane world.
As Trump himself said, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters.”
In a mad world, there will always be people who will vote for a mad president.
That is partly down to an amplification of emotions from modern news media but also down to terrible choices of candidates in two broken parties.
Trump always presents himself as opposing the current 'unfair' deal (be it the Paris Accord, NAFTA, etc) and trying to renegotiate it to be fair to the US. But he never sticks with a new deal. He just opposes deals and rules generally.
Hillary lost because she was a pathetically poor candidate by the DNC who deliberately refused to campaign in the Midwest thus gifting the election to Trump.
There is no evidence there was a surge of turnout because of Trump.
You ask for miracles, Sadiq, I give you the DFT.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1261167168575733760?s=20
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8322507/Police-race-identify-woman-body-cut-pieces-stuffed-suitcases.html?ito=push-notification&ci=15284&si=7627063
The easiest solution to all of this is to scrap the Union as soon as the immediate crisis is out of the way. Then everyone can do their own thing 100% of the time and these sorts of differences will cease to be a problem.
Maybe 2 feet. There is some distancing but not the same as ours.
In domestic policy Westminster is effectively the English Parliament now anyway, it just sets some tax and foreign policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
The American political class is genuinely not fit for purpose, corrupted through and through and indifferent to the lives of those it is meant to serve. I don't find it surprising that an absolute outsider like Trump proved popular and beat so many Senators, governors and insiders. He has proven to be even worse but Biden seems almost the ultimate insider, just as Hillary was.
We love to moan about our governments and rightly so but jeez, we thankfully have very little idea how bad it can be.
In the bowels of Christ, how I hate people like that.
I saw a TV program where a stupid reporter was goading one of the Apollo astronauts who landed on the moon. Trying to get him to say what he would have done if all hope was lost in an accident...
When asked what he would have done, if the Lunar Module ascent engine had failed and he had only 30 min air left, the astronaut replied - "Get my suit on, go outside and work on the engine for half an hour".
As for trading under WTO, when the WTO say we can't trade under WTO rules I do have to ask when you Tories plan to take notice of this. When we conclude EU negotiations and reach out to the WTO in the summer who just laugh at us? With the Tory press simultaneously trumpet "WTO rules" and attack the WTO for trying to sabotage us? Or when the EU shuts the border and we try to trade with other countries who then scratch their heads and go "erm you don know it doesn't work like this don't you?"
At some point there will be no further foreigners to blame. No saboteurs. No remoaner traitor judges. Just fucktard Tory Brexiteers and the poor sodding millions stupid enough to be gaslit by them.
Look, this is not (for me) a left v right thing. I'm on the left. In America I would be a firm Democrat. But I tell you this without a shadow of a lie. If by some stretch of the imagination we picture a choice between "Dem Trump" - the same stupidity, the malevolence, the breathtaking narcissism, offering a programme of full blooded socialism - and "Generic Republican" (a Bush, say, or a Reagan), I would vote for the Republican and would not hesitate for one second in doing so.
Michigan - Hillary got hundreds of thousands of fewer votes than Obama or John Kerry got. Trump' won this with fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost against Kerry.
Wisconsin - Trump got virtually an identical vote tally to Romney and again fewer votes than George W. Bush got when he lost the state. Problem is a quarter of the voters who had voted for Obama and John Kerry didn't vote for Hillary.
There's no evidence of some imagined Trump surge. Reality is that he won on a lower turnout by razor thin margins because hundreds of thousands in those states didn't turn out for Hillary who had turned out for John Kerry and Obama.
Would you be expecting the EU resolve healthcare issues in say Glasgow?
Bill was a master at elective politics in the US context.
However nobody is going to accept that sort of story at face value given the lies and fake news that the American right pump out on a daily basis.
So much for taking back control .
I agree with you on both counts.
Part 1.
List of reserved matters
Reserved matters are subdivided into two categories: General reservations and specific reservations.
General reservations cover major issues which are always handled centrally by the Parliament in Westminster:[5]
the Crown
the Union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland
the making of peace or war
defence
treaties or any relations with foreign states or dominions
naturalisation
external trade
quarantine
navigation (including merchant shipping)
submarine cables
wireless telegraphy
aerial navigation
lighthouses
currency
copyright
treason
the UK Parliament
registration and funding of political parties
international development
the Home Civil Service
Specific reservations cover particular areas of social and economic policy which are reserved to Westminster, listed under 11 'heads':[6]
Head A - Financial and Economic Matters
fiscal, economic and monetary policy
currency
financial services
financial markets
money laundering
Head B - Home Affairs
data protection and access to information
elections
film classification
immigration and nationality
scientific procedures on live animals
national security and counter-terrorism
betting, gaming and lotteries
emergency powers
extradition
lieutenancies
charities
Head C – Trade and Industry
business associations
insolvency
competition
intellectual property
import and export control
sea fishing outside the Scottish zone
customer protection
product standards, safety and liability
weights and measures
telecommunications
postal services
research councils
Head D – Energy
electricity
oil and gas
coal
nuclear energy
energy efficiency
Head E - Transport
marine transport
air transport
Head F – Social Security
social security schemes
child support
pensions
Head G – Regulation of the Professions
architect
health professions
auditor
Head H – Employment
employment and industrial relations
health and safety
Head J – Health and Medicines
xenotransplantation
embryology, surrogacy and human genetics
medicines, medical supplies and poisons
welfare foods
Head K – Media and Culture
broadcasting
public lending right
Head L – Justice
Legal services
Legal aid
Coroners
Arbitration
information rights
mental capacity
personal data
public records
public sector information
Compensation for persons affected by crime and miscarriages of justice
Prisons and offender management
Family relationships and children
Gender recognition
Registration of births, deaths and places of worship
Head M – Land and Agricultural Assets
Registration of land
Registration of agricultural charges and debentures
Development and buildings
Head N – Miscellaneous
judicial salaries
equal opportunities
control of weapons of mass destruction
Ordnance Survey
Deep Sea mining
time
outer space
Antarctica
For us by virtue of geography and because the others are harder or worse to work with that means the EU.
Since we voted to leave we can't be in the EU. Hence we should work closely with them.
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1261257904646172672?s=20
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1261259696431869952?s=20
Conversely, why the situation should still prevail in which these other countries require large areas of policy to be decided by an assembly consisting mainly of English people, goodness only knows.
We must remember that (with all the usual caveats around Northern Ireland,) the UK is a union of nations and not one of regions like most properly constituted federations (the US, Canada, Australia, Germany etc.) And it's one that's outlived its usefulness.
What conceivable value the Union with Scotland, for example, holds for the English people is never adequately articulated. The only obvious answers anybody can come up with are 'we need somewhere to put our ballistic missile submarines' and 'we might have to give up our UN Security Council seat otherwise,' and these are matters of no importance to almost the entire general population of the country - who are mostly interested in getting on with their lives in peace and, to the extent that politics troubles them at all, are primarily concerned with resolving England's many internal problems.
All of the conditions that promoted the creation of the United Kingdom and necessitated its continuity have been removed. It should be euthanized compassionately and given a decent burial.
People trade under WTO. Paying vast tariffs. Never has any country torn up every single trade agreement to trade under WTO in preference to free trade. There's a reason why...
But many Democrat voters belittled Trump, thought he was a pathetic joke and was going to lose heavily - and in the Midwest Hillary declined to campaign. So they didn't vote.
Hillary didn't take her campaign seriously. The Democrats didn't take Trump seriously. The Democrats lost the election, Trump didn't win it.
He'll be recommending turning machine guns on recalcitrant teachers afore ye know it.
No wonder you think behind every shadow is a PB Tory.
Scotland also has its own criminal and civil legal system
The point where she wanted enforce a no-fly zone over Syria - including Russian military aircraft - was..... interesting.
Trump is bad for Brexit because the UK cannot even start to rely on organisations like the WTO in his world. In his world it will be all about power, and if you are not US, China, EU you will be in a terrible starting point.
If someone wants to burn a Union Flag or Cross of St George or Saltire or anything else for that matter [so long as it belongs to them and they do it safely and its not arson] that should be their right to make a peaceful protest.
Instead she threw away the election to the worst President ever [except maybe Andrew Jackson]
Many teachers are great, but, overall, I'm sorry to say that schooling is a prime example of "producer capture". The fact that a former Labour minister is moved to say what he's said is very alarming.
The WTO will still exist Trump or no Trump
What on earth has that got to do with anything I wrote? Perhaps you are the one who is blind drunk.
To spell it out for you, I am agreeing with Foxy that voting for an idiot because they annoy people you don't like is a stupid reason AND saying it is a stupid reason does not provide any kind of additional justification for voting for said idiot.
Many successful free trading nations work seek to trade and work with many blocs while not being in any.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/COVID-19-daily-announced-deaths-15-May-2020.xlsx
It needs judges to make decisions and countries to respect and uphold those decisions.
The USA has rarely done the latter, but at least didnt use to stop the former.
Whatever the WTO rules say powerful countries will do as they please, and the UK will be in shock, saying but the rules say we should be doing it our way. Just as we have done with the EU, continually surprised some countries dont follow the rules whilst we try to.
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1261271110697586690?s=20
Bavaria was once an independent country, that does not stop it now being a region of a Federal Germany.
Scotland also has plenty of oil and renewable energy, a thriving financial sector and whisky industry and some excellent universities and regiments as well as holding Trident. It contributes a great deal to the UK
You really are coming over as irredeemably biased now. C'mon. Get a grip.
We need a trade deal with the US, our biggest export destination and the most powerful nation we need to align with post Brexit to make it sustainable if we are to leave the EU and single market
That reply was aimed at @contrarian not you who wrote this: Sorry for the confusion.
There was a cohort, admittedly small, but it existed, of children who were functionally illiterate as a result of WWII evacuation, and consequent changes of schools. Generally, AIUI, it was children who were moved two or three times.
A trade deal will be great if and when we can get one, but we do not need to align with anyone. We didn't leave one union to become lapdog of another.
It’s there in black and white .
If your thoughts are representative of your parties then there really isnt much hope.
Scotland is a necessary element of the UK, but this is an entirely separate issue to that of whether or not the UK is necessary to Scotland, or its other constituent parts.
Firms given £1bn of state contracts without tender in Covid-19 crisis
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/15/firms-given-1bn-of-state-contracts-without-tender-in-covid-19-crisis
Literally what did they expect, a 3 month tender process? Careful analysis of each companies diversity policies and commitments to paying living wages etc?
We asked a load of vulnerable people to lock themselves a way, things like getting food to them required instant action and it did.
The EU wants unprecedented ones agreed.
What the UK wants has precedence and is there in black and white.
How many centuries has it been since England was an independent nation?
I didn't catch this bit to start with. I don't think this is great news though, very low number of people have had it, a significant percentage with no symptoms, but still total carnage.