The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jisgsaw said:
I... what?
Is there a transcript of her speech somewhere? Was it really that close to Mein Kampf?
Click to expand...

Not so much. Aside from good 'well duh' stuff on tackling slavery and FGM and stopping terrorists, she banged on about stopping students working here post-education (because that makes total sense, right...?!), nabbed Labour's immigrant impact fund with ostensibly re-purposed aims, blamed Labour for the crash (again), and said they'd extend the power of the public in questioning legal sentences (because as we all know, the public know best about sentencing, right?). I can't actually find the list bit in the speech (here), but it was revealed and defended as such yesterday.

I like James O'Brien but I feel this is a wee bit strong. That said, it's clear that the Tories predicate everything on 'British or else', at least at the moment.
 
A City source who attended the conference said he had “never known anything like it,” and criticized the Treasury for lacking a strategy ahead of the Brexit negotiations.

According to this source, the chancellor’s department is clear that the two years envisioned under the Article 50 divorce clause of the EU treaty wasn’t near enough time. “The idea of two years is nonsense.” A four to five year “landing path” is now being discussed in the Treasury, the source added.
Click to expand...
http://www.politico.eu/article/ther...y-party-conference-birmingham-keynote-speech/

Interesting. They'd need the approval of the remaining 27 EU member states to extend the negotiation period.

Some other quotes:
“We’re all hard Brexiteers now,” said a Conservative minister who backed Remain and asked to remain anonymous. “Before long we’ll be talking about Empire.”
Click to expand...
For the most part in Birmingham, politicians who wanted Britain to remain in the EU seemed peripheral to the discussion. But the Remainers are another potential headache for May.

This camp, close to Britain’s financial elites, isn’t willing to give up hope of a soft break from the EU. “The hard Brexiteers have the whip hand now,” one minister who campaigned for Remain said. “But wait till the rubber hits the road.”
Click to expand...
Hammond is widely perceived as a weaker chancellor than his politically plugged-in predecessor George Osborne or Gordon Brown, who was Tony Blair’s Treasury chief. But sources close to Downing Street insist he’s stronger than he appears and is trusted and listened to by May. In the view of these sources, he may be keeping his powder dry until next year, when the talks begin.

Last week, the carmaker Nissan, which employs about 7,000 people in Britain, said it may scrap a planned investment in the country’s biggest car plant if the U.K. leaves the single market. A few more announcements like that by big employers could quickly change the public’s view about whether ending free movement of people from within the EU is worth the cost, said another senior Conservative who supported remaining.

At the end of the day, the Treasury will be a more powerful voice in the Brexit negotiations than any of the three ministers ostensibly charged with responsibility for Brexit — Davis, Fox and Boris Johnson — the minister added. “The key relationship is still between the PM and the chancellor,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
A 4 to 5 year negotiation period would be fine by me, it forces the Tories to face the country before we leave, with four years' worth of strongly pro-remain young people gaining the right to vote. Which is why it won't happen - the government will rush through a fast hard Brexit rather than risk being caught with their trousers down during negotiations.
 
kitch9 said:
Did anyone ask the employees what they thought to their jobs being gambled with or just the guys with mattresses full of cash?
Click to expand...

Lol. Their jobs are gambled with any decision of their CEO. Corporates are not democracies even in the Great Britain.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FXfxbRyjYE
"But surely in a way it will encourage scientists to reach out and make more global connections and be more creative...". Thanks, Newsnight.

Reminds me of the question time when a young researcher expressed concerned about funding opportunities, collaborations etc and the answer was something like "we lost, let's move on" *presenter interrupts* "That we all we have time for, folks. Join us again next week for another edition of question time. Remember it's question time; not answer time. Goodnight"
 
I don't really see what newsnight did wrong there. They asked a question which is exactly what a brexit politician would claim as a benefit of leaving the EU, which was steadily refuted. They didn't interrupt or spin or disagree with the academic...
 
New UKIP leadership favourite Steven Woolfe has been taken to hospital

And you know he'll he treated for free as a holder of an EHIC card

hm.gif


Seriously this UKIP leadership is like a poisoned chalice

EDIT: hmm, seems his condition is apparently serious wonder what happened?
 
Real Hero said:
punched for saying he's going to defect to the tories apparently
Click to expand...

From the Telegraphs Asa Bennett

Asa Bennett ✔ @asabenn
I'm told the "altercation" happened at a "clear the air" meeting Steven Woolfe held with MEPs this morning

Asa Bennett ✔ @asabenn
Ukip source says Woolfe and fellow MEP decided to "take it outside" after things got heated over reports he considered defecting
1:01 PM - 6 Oct 2016

Asa Bennett ✔ @asabenn
Woolfe, I am told, "took off his jacket and invited him outside" - then there was the 'altercation'
1:05 PM - 6 Oct 2016
Click to expand...

Methinks the bold Steven has misplaced confidence in his abilities and an overflated sense of his place in the world.

Rule number one of the "lets take this outside": either be sure the other guy won't say yes or be sure you can beat him if you can. You don't say lets take this outside and get filled in.

Ironic that a Woolfe who has huffed and puffed so much finds himself knocked down.
 
TheLaughingStock said:
I can help you see light on why that sector probably shouldn't take up 12% of output hence the much need change in attitude with respect to preferential treatment. Skim this: http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/luigi.zingales/papers/research/Finance.pdf
Click to expand...

Wanted to say thanks for this. Was interesting. One of the most intriguing is that even this financial academic engaging in industry-reflection at times justs takes as given certain interpretations of some things, that would not be viewed so by society generally. Eg the benefit of caveat emptor incentivising the buyer to collect information is for most people indistinguishable from the negative of incentivising the seller to find ways to deceive buyers. And the the moral hazard of insurance is focused on the behaviour of the insured being bad for the insurer and completely neglects the "reward" that people who see doctors regularly and get medication for potential problems have lower lifetime health costs.
 
Just found out that chemical regulation seems to have ruled out "the Norway option".I'd assumed that with the Great Repeal Bill, we'd somehow write those EU regulations into our national law and continue to work as a de facto member of EU regulatory bodies (since our regulatory body is pretty huge and influential).
Implementing our own regulations would be massively costly and hugely damaging. Chemicals are a globalised market and it's already a lot of hassle to get stuff properly authorised in the different EU member states even when they are ostensibly all using a harmonised system of uniform principles. No one is going to want to do everything again for a parallel UK system.

Our Health and Safety Executive seems to think they will have to write their own policy ("with hookers and blackjack" I expect) but hasn't got a clue how to do this.

Since all EU quango, commission and national regulators work in English and there is already a lot of fear about the HSE/DEFRA closing/relocating some of their departments located in expensive buildings, I suspect we'll see a lot of our experts end up in Germany, France, Holland, Finland or Italy (where the other major EU regulatory bodies are located).
Very sad, considering that the UK had a virtuous circle where our high EU influence meant we got many of the EU's "best and brightest" to move here, thus increasing our influence.

The (admittedly small) company I work for now has zero non-UK nationals in its UK offices. Every one of them has left and all the EU new hires have gone to other EU offices.

But at least we'll be able to make our own rules about how much fruit is allowed in jam.
...except we won't because apparently we intend on trading it with the EU so it'll be high-fruit English fruit spread or whatever those EU bureaucrats insist on calling it.
...except we will, because that was a fake "blame the EU" story and jam was always defined by the UK law on jam, which was mutually recognised in the EU; and which Vince Cable amended to satisfy the middle-class artisan jam lobby (well, who else votes Lib-Dem these days).
...except we won't because hard Brexit means no automatic mutual recognition, so we'll have to get our jams checked by customs against the relevant and varied laws amongst the EU 27.
...except fuck it, that's way too complex so let the French eat their Bonne Maman instead.
 
Having EU citizen free movement isn't really leaving the EU. Norway and Switzerland are effectively de facto members because of that EU regulation. Seriously, if you keep EU rules in that area.. then there's no point of leaving. That 52% didn't vote out so they could leave the single market and have to tighten their belts. Not saying they really had a plan for leaving, but they didn't vote leave because they wanted to leave the single market, rather, they wanted their own immigration control and regulations. However, to stay in the single market may not leave any agreement from Brussels that the UK should accept on the table. A hard Brexit may be the only way this is possible, and a hard Brexit would actually leave the single market, there's no way Brussels would agree to anything else. The only incentive they have to is to keep Western Europe entirely stable, whereas they have a strong incentive to discourage other countries from triggering Article 50.

Also, can Northern Ireland actually be forced out? Northern Ireland has a special constitutional role within the UK thanks to the Good Friday Agreement.

Article on it and legal challenges here: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-37545894
 
Huw_Dawson said:
A 4 to 5 year negotiation period would be fine by me, it forces the Tories to face the country before we leave, with four years' worth of strongly pro-remain young people gaining the right to vote. Which is why it won't happen - the government will rush through a fast hard Brexit rather than risk being caught with their trousers down during negotiations.
Click to expand...
It can't happen. What will Britain offer to the countries that it is pissing off with their anti freedom of movement stance? Only takes one country to kick them out after two years.
 
Retaining freedom of movement without the forcing of payment of in work subsidies and automatic right to access social housing would solve the problems across the continent pretty much overnight.
 
Lucreto said:
1 EUR = 0.892008 GBP

That can't be right. Computer glitch?
Click to expand...

indeed it looks likely

Analysts speculate that a computer may have been set to scan the news for negative Brexit stories, with the order to sell if it found any.
The trigger could have also been a simple mistake, or what's know as a fat finger trade, when a trader enters a wrong number.
Click to expand...
 
Zaph said:
Great, our homes are already spec built to some of the smallest sizes in Europe. Fuck quality of life, right? (and means we don't have to build as much in Tory NIMBY areas).

3ACvjrp.png
Click to expand...

Exactly. Our homes are cramped as it is.

I posted before how councils are auctioning off parcels of land previously thought too small for a home (which is saying something given our historically small homes) for a shoe box to be fitted on. What sort of quality of life is that to be living in an ugly box on a corner of a road where a bench and a bit of grass verge or tree was once there.

We have flats going up but there's no new roads, its bottleneck city here in Manchester. how about expanding rather than squeezing in flats and awfully small homes.

UK went down the concrete jungle road before and it led to misery and crime, they got mostly demolished in the 80s and 90s. This include maisonette style, not just high rise buildings.
 
I don't really get the big deal about the house thing. He's saying "Build them small, sell them for less". What's all you guys' alternative suggestion? Is it "local councils build them massive for cheap", by any chance?
 
CyclopsRock said:
I don't really get the big deal about the house thing. He's saying "Build them small, sell them for less". What's all you guys' alternative suggestion? Is it "local councils build them massive for cheap", by any chance?
Click to expand...

The basic implication of that statement was that in order to solve the housing crisis, they should be looking to sell (or, more realistically, rent) "young people" what would essentially be glorified hotel rooms. It's not even talking about small houses, it's talking about small flats. Whilst probably marginally better than having no roof over ones head, that sounds pretty atrocious from a quality of life point of view to me.
 
DiGiKerot said:
The basic implication of that statement was that in order to solve the housing crisis, they should be looking to sell (or, more realistically, rent) "young people" what would essentially be glorified hotel rooms. It's not even talking about small houses, it's talking about small flats. Whilst probably marginally better than having no roof over ones head, that sounds pretty atrocious from a quality of life point of view to me.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say having a small flat is "marginally" better than being homeless. The problem here is that house prices keep getting higher and higher whilst peoples' ability to save for a deposit is not increasing. Ergo they rent and/or live at home, waiting for a relative to die so they can inherit enough to get a deposit. Having flats that start out cheaper alleviates this to some degree. I don't think he was claiming it was some silver bullet that'll solve all our problems.
 
Hollande demands tough Brexit negotiations
Britain must suffer the consequences of leaving the EU in order to save the institution from an existential crisis, François Hollande said on Thursday.

Speaking in Paris at a dinner attended by Jean-Claude Juncker, EU commission president, and Michel Barnier, the EU’s top Brexit negotiator, the French president urged the bloc to lead tough negotiations with the UK to avoid contagion and protect the fundamental principles of the single market.

“The UK has decided to do a Brexit, I believe even a hard Brexit. Well, then we must go all the way through the UK’s willingness to leave the EU. We have to have this firmness,” President Hollande told 150 guests at the 20th anniversary of Notre Europe, the pro-EU think-tank founded by Jacques Delors, the former EU commission chief.

“If not, we would jeopardise the fundamental principles of the EU. Other countries would want to leave the EU to get the supposed advantages without the obligations.”

The Socialist leader insisted: “There must be a threat, there must be a risk, there must be a price. Otherwise we will be in a negotiation that cannot end well.”
...
Click to expand...

Cherry-picking what you want is not going to work, May.
 
CyclopsRock said:
I wouldn't say having a small flat is "marginally" better than being homeless. The problem here is that house prices keep getting higher and higher whilst peoples' ability to save for a deposit is not increasing. Ergo they rent and/or live at home, waiting for a relative to die so they can inherit enough to get a deposit. Having flats that start out cheaper alleviates this to some degree. I don't think he was claiming it was some silver bullet that'll solve all our problems.
Click to expand...

Except they won't be cheaper, labour will be the same, cost of materials will drop, but they'll be building on land in high demand area's so that will drive costs up so it'll be the same status quo. Then they'll likely be shared ownership which will actually drive the cost up, pricing will be lower than a full mortgage but repayments will be higher so again not making it any easier.
 
frontieruk said:
Except they won't be cheaper, labour will be the same, cost of materials will drop, but they'll be building on land in high demand area's so that will drive costs up so it'll be the same status quo. Then they'll likely be shared ownership which will actually drive the cost up, pricing will be lower than a full mortgage but repayments will be higher so again not making it any easier.
Click to expand...
More houses available bring all house prices down though (right? or is the effect negligible?)

To be fair these sound like those studio apartments with basically 1 room, the "kitchen" along one wall and a bathroom. It's not ideal but it's an option that many people take as a stepping stone to something bigger.
 
nature boy said:
Hollande demands tough Brexit negotiations


Cherry-picking what you want is not going to work, May.
Click to expand...
Judging by this week we're not even going to try and cherry pick. :'(

“If not, we would jeopardise the fundamental principles of the EU. Other countries would want to leave the EU to get the supposed advantages without the obligations.”
Click to expand...
This guy needs to brush up on his sales pitch if he wants to deter other countries. Calling these things obligations when they're agreed in most cases to be positive requirements doesn't help!
 
*Splinter said:
More houses available bring all house prices down though (right? or is the effect negligible?)

To be fair these sound like those studio apartments with basically 1 room, the "kitchen" along one wall and a bathroom. It's not ideal but it's an option that many people take as a stepping stone to something bigger.
Click to expand...

That never happens that never works. People whom selling arent going to take any less than current market values, the buyers will pay what they have to pay, there's no lack of buyers. We'll just end up with smaller expensive houses with stressed people in them.
 
Dougald said:
At this point I'd almost welcome Blair back

almost
Click to expand...
Well if it means Labour can be a functioning opposition again...

Calabi said:
That never happens that never works. People whom selling arent going to take any less than current market values, the buyers will pay what they have to pay, there's no lack of buyers. We'll just end up with smaller expensive houses with stressed people in them.
Click to expand...
That's because we never build enough new homes. I don't expect a few tiny box houses to be enough either though, so I guess you're right.
 
frontieruk said:
Except they won't be cheaper, labour will be the same, cost of materials will drop, but they'll be building on land in high demand area's so that will drive costs up so it'll be the same status quo. Then they'll likely be shared ownership which will actually drive the cost up, pricing will be lower than a full mortgage but repayments will be higher so again not making it any easier.
Click to expand...
They will be cheaper. Labour costs are less due to sub contract trade operatives system of working.
Bricklayers work per ex amount of bricks laid, plastering is per Sq metre. carpenter is a per fix basis as are plumbers and the smaller and less complex the house the less we charge for each package within a build.
More houses per acre of land would also reduce cost significantly.
 
Ushojax said:
Blair is a cast-iron cunt but he's not wrong about the current state of our politics. It's a sorry state of affairs that him returning is even semi-plausible.
Click to expand...

I would be happy to see him return at this point, sadly I doubt he can get any momentum at all, I mean who would he join? Labour? not a chance. Lib Dem?

The Centralist party that has been rumored for a while (pragmatic Labour and Conservative MP's looking for a soft Brexit / GE / 2nd Ref etc...)?

He is damaged goods these days, but the closest thing the center left have to an elder statesmen (sadly).
 
There were polls during the EU referendum campaign that showed Blair was less trusted than Corbyn. So that's how well that would go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Resetera and the pedo problem (updates)
NSFW  43 44 45 46 47
2K
491K
notkeylime replied
  • Locked
What relaxes you the most?
0
4K
Halo is Back replied
  • Locked
What is the most painless way to commit suicide?
3
4K
EviLore replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
Nutrition and studies - what does the science say?
10
8K
mekes replied
Top Bottom