I'd say it's 50 50 at the moment between no deal and a last-minute revokation as suggested here by Ms Beverley. It all depends on the level of panic in late March - it's not behind the bounds of possibility that parliament will revoke at 10 pm on March 29 if the forecasts of project fear have been proved correct by then.
No - project fear was the Osborne frothing about the immediate impact on the markets of a leave vote. Which was a politician's view of events motivated by the desire to influence a vote. What we have now is project fact - industry isn't making up the effects of crash Brexit no matter how many times that morons say "project fear" in response.
I expect that the majority of "its all project fear" morons will change their minds as reality slams them in the gut. The minority won't as they are fixated on the ideology of their "prize". And we will be able to feel the effects before we crash out as business starts to pull the plugs out before the bomb drops. Whether thats enough to change opinions or not I don't know - I've said before that I can see May's final act as PM being revocation of Article 50. It would end her politically of course. But her sense of duty - if its to the country and not the party - surely would shape her thinking.
What are so many people not convinced, including respected Uni Profs if it is all so obvious?
Should be the simplest argument in the world for "Project Opinion."
If Parliament backs a compromise deal with the Brady amendment and the EU reject it then they've chosen No Deal.
Interesting definition of a compromise, where one party unilaterally renegotiates and presents a demand to the other party.
Well, that would be an internal Tory compromise, not a compromise with either the Labour party nor The EU27.
May is so convinced of her own rectitude, and so rigid in her thinking, that she does not seem to do compromise. Has she compromised on anything in her career? She has certainly failed to implement things in her manifesto, but has she ever changed her mind?
If Parliament backs a compromise deal with the Brady amendment and the EU reject it then they've chosen No Deal.
Interesting definition of a compromise, where one party unilaterally renegotiates and presents a demand to the other party.
If parliament backs the Brady amendment, nullifying the existing WA, then it gives May a way to request an extension without it looking like she's giving in to those who want to stop Brexit. Never underestimate her can kicking abilities.
If Parliament backs a compromise deal with the Brady amendment and the EU reject it then they've chosen No Deal.
Interesting definition of a compromise, where one party unilaterally renegotiates and presents a demand to the other party.
Well, that would be an internal Tory compromise, not a compromise with either the Labour party nor The EU27.
May is so convinced of her own rectitude, and so rigid in her thinking, that she does not seem to do compromise. Has she compromised on anything in her career? She has certainly failed to implement things in her manifesto, but has she ever changed hermind?
One thing May understands is that you can stick to a position indefinitely, as long as you never deliver on it.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
Strongly disagree.
What is shambolic is trapping millions in poverty because work doesn't pay. Whatever the teething issues (of which there have been many) with UC its implementation has helped a record number of people enter work. It's no coincidence that reforms to make work pay rather than welfare paying better than work has then seen employment surge to record levels.
Any reform of this magnitude would have teething issues but not doing anything isn't the solution.
There speaks a fat and happy Tory, just wondering why the work house was not part of UC.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The link doesn't suggests that there's reason for unalloyed pleasure. For example it says that 'two-thirds of the growth in employment since 2008 has been in ‘atypical’ roles such as self-employment, zero-hours contracts or agency work.' Although it must be conceded that the rate of growth in this are has slowed recently.
If Parliament backs a compromise deal with the Brady amendment and the EU reject it then they've chosen No Deal.
Interesting definition of a compromise, where one party unilaterally renegotiates and presents a demand to the other party.
Well, that would be an internal Tory compromise, not a compromise with either the Labour party nor The EU27.
May is so convinced of her own rectitude, and so rigid in her thinking, that she does not seem to do compromise. Has she compromised on anything in her career? She has certainly failed to implement things in her manifesto, but has she ever changed her mind?
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
"There can be no comparison between the minuscule antisemitic threat from the far right and the widespread legitimisation of antisemitism by the Corbynite leadership of the Labour Party."
"But I cannot understand how any supporter of equal citizenship can support the Labour Party in its current state"
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
In retrospect the decision to abort the comprehensive NHS IT system because it couldn't be guaranteed to work properly seems like a good idea.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
Strongly disagree.
What is shambolic is trapping millions in poverty because work doesn't pay. Whatever the teething issues (of which there have been many) with UC its implementation has helped a record number of people enter work. It's no coincidence that reforms to make work pay rather than welfare paying better than work has then seen employment surge to record levels.
Any reform of this magnitude would have teething issues but not doing anything isn't the solution.
How "Victorian Mill Owner" of you! What is next on your agenda? Letting little match-girls die in the snow so that the rest of us can appreciate our good fortune that it was not us?
People are not complaining about the principle of the thing, they are complaining that it takes no account of standard work practices and payment patterns and that sanctions by the system are automatic and instant and take months to sort out and when you are on the bottom of the heap, losing a big chunk of your income is a real problem.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
Those 'other' things are linked. The reforms of welfare are part of the solution which is working so well.
Whether UC is a 'shambles' is a moot point. You only get to hear about the cases where it works out badly for particular individuals or groups. That's not to say there aren't problems which need to be fixed, as the government has acknowledged. Nor is it the case that there were never such problems under the old system.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
Former White House chief strategist and Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon is the unidentified "high-ranking Trump campaign official" in special counsel Robert Mueller's indictment of Roger Stone, CNBC has learned.
Mr. Nabavi, aye. There are certain inherent biases in collective reporting/memory. Almost exclusively good music is remembered from the 1960s, and social services tend to only make the news when something horrific has happened.
"Social worker does a really good job" is a headline that I'd be surprised to ever see.
The central tenet of UC is sound, but it does appear that there are significant problems in execution.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
Those 'other' things are linked. The reforms of welfare are part of the solution which is working so well.
Whether UC is a 'shambles' is a moot point. You only get to hear about the cases where it works out badly for particular individuals or groups. That's not to say there aren't problems which need to be fixed, as the government has acknowledged. Nor is it the case that there were never such problems under the old system.
I am happy to admit that parts of the system work well and are an improvement, but they cannot be used to balance out the misery they inflict on those at the bottom when the system goes wrong.
This is not a zero-sum game. There are people suffering because of this. You and I are not, but others are.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
In retrospect the decision to abort the comprehensive NHS IT system because it couldn't be guaranteed to work properly seems like a good idea.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The link doesn't suggests that there's reason for unalloyed pleasure. For example it says that 'two-thirds of the growth in employment since 2008 has been in ‘atypical’ roles such as self-employment, zero-hours contracts or agency work.' Although it must be conceded that the rate of growth in this are has slowed recently.
Indeed. It's a very good report, which actually looks at the facts dispassionately and has some very interesting information in it. Unfortunately it's got rather buried under Brexit noise, but it's well worth studying.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
Strongly disagree.
What is shambolic is trapping millions in poverty because work doesn't pay. Whatever the teething issues (of which there have been many) with UC its implementation has helped a record number of people enter work. It's no coincidence that reforms to make work pay rather than welfare paying better than work has then seen employment surge to record levels.
Any reform of this magnitude would have teething issues but not doing anything isn't the solution.
How "Victorian Mill Owner" of you! What is next on your agenda? Letting little match-girls die in the snow so that the rest of us can appreciate our good fortune that it was not us?
People are not complaining about the principle of the thing, they are complaining that it takes no account of standard work practices and payment patterns and that sanctions by the system are automatic and instant and take months to sort out and when you are on the bottom of the heap, losing a big chunk of your income is a real problem.
Exactly right. Friend of mine was talking about her experiences working at a food bank the other day, in what is generally regarded as quite an affluent town. What is so horrific (words used deliberately) is that very often it's not the claimants fault. Somewhere the system has gone awry.
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
Those 'other' things are linked. The reforms of welfare are part of the solution which is working so well.
Whether UC is a 'shambles' is a moot point. You only get to hear about the cases where it works out badly for particular individuals or groups. That's not to say there aren't problems which need to be fixed, as the government has acknowledged. Nor is it the case that there were never such problems under the old system.
A moot point?
Your complacency is stunning.
The problems with Universal Credit are at such a basic level - people paying rent weekly rather than monthly - that they go far beyond administration problems with previous systems.
It's worth pointing out that problems like this prevent people from receiving the support the law as legislated for says that they should receive. But today your partisanship prevents you from acknowledging it.
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
Strongly disagree.
What is shambolic is trapping millions in poverty because work doesn't pay. Whatever the teething issues (of which there have been many) with UC its implementation has helped a record number of people enter work. It's no coincidence that reforms to make work pay rather than welfare paying better than work has then seen employment surge to record levels.
Any reform of this magnitude would have teething issues but not doing anything isn't the solution.
How "Victorian Mill Owner" of you! What is next on your agenda? Letting little match-girls die in the snow so that the rest of us can appreciate our good fortune that it was not us?
People are not complaining about the principle of the thing, they are complaining that it takes no account of standard work practices and payment patterns and that sanctions by the system are automatic and instant and take months to sort out and when you are on the bottom of the heap, losing a big chunk of your income is a real problem.
Exactly right. Friend of mine was talking about her experiences working at a food bank the other day, in what is generally regarded as quite an affluent town. What is so horrific (words used deliberately) is that very often it's not the claimants fault. Somewhere the system has gone awry.
I think it is sometimes forgotten that the numbers in the system are actual people, some of whom are at their wits end.
Thirty TOP INTELLECTUALS have written to the Guardian and told us why the EU is FAB.
Not any old intellectuals, these are TOP intellectuals, and they say things like this:
“We must rediscover political voluntarism or accept that resentment, hatred, and their cortege of sad passions will surround and submerge us.”
That’s it’s, isn’t it? Brexit is done. Over. Finit. The TOP intellectuals have spoken and we must abandon our surrounding cortège of sad passions. I always thought that cortège would be an issue.
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
Well, apart from smashing up the speed cameras. A good reason for many to don the yellow jacket...
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
And yet inequality has fallen, more people than ever are in work, and there has been a quite spectacular decrease in unemployment amongst the most disadvantaged groups (especially the disabled). So the government seems to be doing something right.
The govt may well be doing other things correctly, but that does not excuse the shambles of UC where even the simple act of being paid twice (4 weekly pay cycle in a 5 week month) can lose you significant amounts of money.
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
Don't say that, I'd be terribly disappointed if Nabavi didn't ooze sanguine self satisfaction whatever his personal circs.
Thirty TOP INTELLECTUALS have written to the Guardian and told us why the EU is FAB.
Not any old intellectuals, these are TOP intellectuals, and they say things like this:
“We must rediscover political voluntarism or accept that resentment, hatred, and their cortege of sad passions will surround and submerge us.”
That’s it’s, isn’t it? Brexit is done. Over. Finit. The TOP intellectuals have spoken and we must abandon our surrounding cortège of sad passions. I always thought that cortège would be an issue.
You have to fold them up carefully and wrap them in tissue paper.
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
Brexiteers take note, moods turn.
Don't tell Alanbrooke. No one likes to see a grown man cry
No surprise Emperor Macron's ratings are up. First whiff of grapeshot from the people and he surrenders. What's not to like as far as a French poll respondent is concerned?
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
Brexiteers take note, moods turn.
Don't tell Alanbrooke. No one likes to see a grown man cry
Hey Roger, entirely off topic (apart from discussions of our marvellous welfare system), but if you're talking to your Edinburgh South relative, compliment him on his office staff, particularly Emma. I'm trying to sort out the fuckup that is the life of my hapless brother, & she provided the first glimmer of hope in the ghastly mess.
The problems with Universal Credit are at such a basic level - people paying rent weekly rather than monthly - that they go far beyond administration problems with previous systems.
It's worth pointing out that problems like this prevent people from receiving the support the law as legislated for says that they should receive. But today your partisanship prevents you from acknowledging it.
No, I do acknowledge it. Unfortunately, partisanship drives much of the criticisms of UC.
Again, I recommend the Resolution Foundation's work on this. They criticise the things that are going wrong, but in a balanced way. See, for example, this blog post (written before the 2018 Budget changes which addressed some of the concerns):
As for the goals of Universal Credit, they are well documented and are widely agreed in principle even by Labour.
Whatever the goals are, the implementation and roll-out have been shambolic.
Strongly disagree.
What is shambolic is trapping millions in poverty because work doesn't pay. Whatever the teething issues (of which there have been many) with UC its implementation has helped a record number of people enter work. It's no coincidence that reforms to make work pay rather than welfare paying better than work has then seen employment surge to record levels.
Any reform of this magnitude would have teething issues but not doing anything isn't the solution.
How "Victorian Mill Owner" of you! What is next on your agenda? Letting little match-girls die in the snow so that the rest of us can appreciate our good fortune that it was not us?
People are not complaining about the principle of the thing, they are complaining that it takes no account of standard work practices and payment patterns and that sanctions by the system are automatic and instant and take months to sort out and when you are on the bottom of the heap, losing a big chunk of your income is a real problem.
Exactly right. Friend of mine was talking about her experiences working at a food bank the other day, in what is generally regarded as quite an affluent town. What is so horrific (words used deliberately) is that very often it's not the claimants fault. Somewhere the system has gone awry.
I think it is sometimes forgotten that the numbers in the system are actual people, some of whom are at their wits end.
Yep - some of the people that work in the system are absolute shits too.
Mr. JS, that reminds me a bit of the capitulation of Richard II to the three dukes (think it was three) only to pick them off one by one afterwards and reassert himself, and the Charter of the Forest imposed on Henry III (or, for that matter, Magna Carta).
In each instance, 'popular' (well, baronial/ducal) dissatisfaction with the ruler led to concessions that were diluted or, at least attempted, thrown out later.
Trumps caved according to 5 live. Ending shutdown temporarily.
The final straw must be the closing of New York and other domestic airports
However, one big win for Nancy
His approval rating has taken a bit of a knock since the shutdown began. This puzzled me at first. It's withstood all his outrageous and scandalous behaviour in the past so I wondered why his loyal base wasn't ignoring this particular outrage. In fact it turns out the base does indeed remain loyal (or purblind, if you like) but it's the small band of uncommitted voters who are pinning the blame on him in a way they haven't before.
Can't be many of them left, of course, so don't expect the rating to drop much further.
Thirty TOP INTELLECTUALS have written to the Guardian and told us why the EU is FAB.
Not any old intellectuals, these are TOP intellectuals, and they say things like this:
“We must rediscover political voluntarism or accept that resentment, hatred, and their cortege of sad passions will surround and submerge us.”
That’s it’s, isn’t it? Brexit is done. Over. Finit. The TOP intellectuals have spoken and we must abandon our surrounding cortège of sad passions. I always thought that cortège would be an issue.
To be fair we truly do need to rediscover political voluntarism, because I don't know what that means.
But perhaps the rest of it is easier for me to grasp.
Trumps caved according to 5 live. Ending shutdown temporarily.
The final straw must be the closing of New York and other domestic airports
However, one big win for Nancy
His approval rating has taken a bit of a knock since the shutdown began. This puzzled me at first. It's withstood all his outrageous and scandalous behaviour in the past so I wondered why his loyal base wasn't ignoring this particular outrage. In fact it turns out the base does indeed remain loyal (or purblind, if you like) but it's the small band of uncommitted voters who are pinning the blame on him in a way they haven't before.
Can't be many of them left, of course, so don't expect the rating to drop much further.
Be careful if you're basing that on party identification. Remember that people who are pissed off at him might change their identification as well as their approval.
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
Brexiteers take note, moods turn.
Yes, but the no dealers are banking on that being too late. Macron isn't' up against a ticking clock.
Well they got the title wrong. "EU coming apart before our eyes" is probably better. The 'populism' is a reaction against multiculturalism splitting societies.
The other element is that like the US shutdown, people get pissed off at disruption. I think the gilet jaune are less popular and representative than they think. Many French must be sick of them smashing the place up.
Brexiteers take note, moods turn.
Don't tell Alanbrooke. No one likes to see a grown man cry
Hey Roger, entirely off topic (apart from discussions of our marvellous welfare system), but if you're talking to your Edinburgh South relative, compliment him on his office staff, particularly Emma. I'm trying to sort out the fuckup that is the life of my hapless brother, & she provided the first glimmer of hope in the ghastly mess.
Good to hear. At least one MP knows what they're doing! Just texted to pass your message on. I'm sure he'll be pleased.
Trumps caved according to 5 live. Ending shutdown temporarily.
The final straw must be the closing of New York and other domestic airports
However, one big win for Nancy
His approval rating has taken a bit of a knock since the shutdown began. This puzzled me at first. It's withstood all his outrageous and scandalous behaviour in the past so I wondered why his loyal base wasn't ignoring this particular outrage. In fact it turns out the base does indeed remain loyal (or purblind, if you like) but it's the small band of uncommitted voters who are pinning the blame on him in a way they haven't before.
Can't be many of them left, of course, so don't expect the rating to drop much further.
I'm deffo up for joining the Arsonists of the Spirit and Soul Movement. Sounds very 1920's!
Ugh old white people. A truly disgusting sight to all those on the left.
I’m on the center right. If you wanted to show that Brexit is a nostalgia driven cause you could hardly have a better image. Backwards not towards.
As Nixon said, sort of, "what you gonna do, when you haven't got Brussels to kick around?"
You may have boots and the feet they have been on in recent times confused there.
The EU is mostly directed by the Germans, but would like to be directed by the French, and Brexit delivers that for them. The Italians were happy with the Germans being in charge - they liked the open chequebook, however the French running the show is another matter entirely. They've not forgotten that the French made an opportunist dash for Italian land and were only thwarted by the Americans.
(There was a series on TV called 'Soap' - I think there are some parallels with the EU)
I watched that Francois clip today and wondered what on earth gave anyone the impression that the Buccaneering Brexiteers are a bunch of reactionary, nationalist, backward-looking xenophobes.
I watched that Francois clip today and wondered what on earth gave anyone the impression that the Buccaneering Brexiteers are a bunch of reactionary, nationalist, backward-looking xenophobes.
How do you pronounce his name - is it Franco Is.....?
The shutdown in the US is worth watching more closely: wealthy, privileged members of the elite inflicting degrees of misery they will not experience on millions of ordinary people because false promises were made to win a vote. That’ll be us in a few weeks time.
Thirty TOP INTELLECTUALS have written to the Guardian and told us why the EU is FAB.
Not any old intellectuals, these are TOP intellectuals, and they say things like this:
“We must rediscover political voluntarism or accept that resentment, hatred, and their cortege of sad passions will surround and submerge us.”
That’s it’s, isn’t it? Brexit is done. Over. Finit. The TOP intellectuals have spoken and we must abandon our surrounding cortège of sad passions. I always thought that cortège would be an issue.
To be fair we truly do need to rediscover political voluntarism, because I don't know what that means.
But perhaps the rest of it is easier for me to grasp.
I should think the top intellectuals will be so busy manning the foodbank, stocking the night shelter, going door to door with leaflets about pot holes, running the Scouts and ringing the bell for early service that they will hardly have time to concoct a realistic and achievable plan for reordering Europe according to the visions of Dante, Goethe and Erasmus.
And of course they will run into the Davos crowd every time they try to make the teas and coffees for the infants school PTA.
Thank you, Pulpstar, but we are maintaining a respectful silence about that on here.
Why ?
Underprepared.. wrong team picks .. someone should be screaming about it.
Underprepared? Probably. Wrong team? You're really only talking about one selection - Curran for Broad. They can at least put that right for the next Test. On the last Ashes Tour there were a number of inexplicable selections in the squad, and they were stuck with them for the Tour.
Comments
deleted
Should be the simplest argument in the world for "Project Opinion."
May is so convinced of her own rectitude, and so rigid in her thinking, that she does not seem to do compromise. Has she compromised on anything in her career? She has certainly failed to implement things in her manifesto, but has she ever changed her mind?
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1088844387185016839
If your abode, or your ability to put food on the table, was at risk from a badly implemented govt IT system, I suspect that you would be a lot less sanguine about the whole thing.
"There can be no comparison between the minuscule antisemitic threat from the far right and the widespread legitimisation of antisemitism by the Corbynite leadership of the Labour Party."
"But I cannot understand how any supporter of equal citizenship can support the Labour Party in its current state"
https://www.thejc.com/comment/analysis/corbyn-threat-is-much-greater-than-far-right-1.479120
People are not complaining about the principle of the thing, they are complaining that it takes no account of standard work practices and payment patterns and that sanctions by the system are automatic and instant and take months to sort out and when you are on the bottom of the heap, losing a big chunk of your income is a real problem.
Whether UC is a 'shambles' is a moot point. You only get to hear about the cases where it works out badly for particular individuals or groups. That's not to say there aren't problems which need to be fixed, as the government has acknowledged. Nor is it the case that there were never such problems under the old system.
Former White House chief strategist and Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon is the unidentified "high-ranking Trump campaign official" in special counsel Robert Mueller's indictment of Roger Stone, CNBC has learned.
"Social worker does a really good job" is a headline that I'd be surprised to ever see.
The central tenet of UC is sound, but it does appear that there are significant problems in execution.
This is not a zero-sum game. There are people suffering because of this. You and I are not, but others are.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1088849900241076226
Brexiteers take note, moods turn.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47004279/andrea-leadsom-eu-could-grant-uk-more-time-on-brexit
Your complacency is stunning.
The problems with Universal Credit are at such a basic level - people paying rent weekly rather than monthly - that they go far beyond administration problems with previous systems.
It's worth pointing out that problems like this prevent people from receiving the support the law as legislated for says that they should receive. But today your partisanship prevents you from acknowledging it.
https://twitter.com/nxthompson/status/1088851204631875584
Oh, hold on a minute.
That's "corsage".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/25/one-way-england-achieve-brexit-achieving-independence-uk/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/authors/robert-taylor/
https://twitter.com/PSYCH_HYPE/status/1088807463841947648
Here's a recent example of his rhetorical power.
https://twitter.com/RobDunsmore/status/1088134870570881024
Again, I recommend the Resolution Foundation's work on this. They criticise the things that are going wrong, but in a balanced way. See, for example, this blog post (written before the 2018 Budget changes which addressed some of the concerns):
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/universal-credit-the-honesty-we-owe-and-the-changes-we-need/
Group of historians and writers publish manifesto warning against rise of populism"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/25/europe-coming-apart-before-our-eyes-say-30-top-intellectuals?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
He could go on: "We are not merely a body of islands. We are an island of bodies..."
They seem to thrive on fecking peoples lives up.
However, one big win for Nancy
In each instance, 'popular' (well, baronial/ducal) dissatisfaction with the ruler led to concessions that were diluted or, at least attempted, thrown out later.
I wonder if we'll see that with the UK/EU.
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1088863070171160576
https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1088074209367085056
Can't be many of them left, of course, so don't expect the rating to drop much further.
But perhaps the rest of it is easier for me to grasp.
A truly disgusting sight to all those on the left.
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani says more than 45,000 members of the country's security forces have been killed since he became leader in 2014.
The figure is far higher than previously thought, with Mr Ghani saying late last year that 28,000 had been killed since 2015.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47005558
The EU is mostly directed by the Germans, but would like to be directed by the French, and Brexit delivers that for them. The Italians were happy with the Germans being in charge - they liked the open chequebook, however the French running the show is another matter entirely. They've not forgotten that the French made an opportunist dash for Italian land and were only thwarted by the Americans.
(There was a series on TV called 'Soap' - I think there are some parallels with the EU)
And of course they will run into the Davos crowd every time they try to make the teas and coffees for the infants school PTA.
Underprepared.. wrong team picks .. someone should be screaming about it.
Pause
I'll get me coat...
However on further inspection it appears Meghan Markle is in the audience. Between the two bald heads. The ones at the front, that is...