Bellend Sebastian Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 23 minutes ago, toddybad said: Fun fact: the vast majority (as in almost all) of buttons at pedestrian crossings do nothing at all to affect when the traffic lights turn to red. I promise you that's absolutely true. Everything you've ever believed in, shattered. That's true at traffic light controlled junctions and intersections, but not where you've got a pedestrian crossing that's just on a bit of road. They would never turn red if you didn't press the button, why would they? You've dragged me into an argument about traffic lights, see what you've done
Guest Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 2 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said: That's true at traffic light controlled junctions and intersections, but not where you've got a pedestrian crossing that's just on a bit of road. They would never turn red if you didn't press the button, why would they? You've dragged me into an argument about traffic lights, see what you've done Lol. Yeah you're right. The majority of crossings are at junctions so we're both right.
Innovindil Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 30 minutes ago, toddybad said: Fun fact: the vast majority (as in almost all) of buttons at pedestrian crossings do nothing at all to affect when the traffic lights turn to red. I promise you that's absolutely true. Everything you've ever believed in, shattered. Can think of at least 3 sets just on my way to work that need human interaction to change to red. #FakeNews 1
Guest Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 1 minute ago, Innovindil said: Can think of at least 3 sets just on my way to work that need human interaction to change to red. #FakeNews Right winger sees something and assumes it must be a blanket fact. Bet you see more than three junctions.... #callmethepedestriancrossingquisling
Innovindil Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 1 hour ago, toddybad said: Right winger sees something and assumes it must be a blanket fact. Bet you see more than three junctions.... #callmethepedestriancrossingquisling I'd count them, but then we'd just get into an argument about the definition of "vast majority" and run round in circles. 1
Strokes Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 2 hours ago, Buce said: Don't be absurd. Our Man of the People would never be so crass as to exclude the vegans. I seem to recall that one of the central planks to the Leave campaign was the imminence of millions of Turks coming over here to steal our jobs and rape our women. Last time I was in Turkey, they looked fairly brown to me (you know, in a swarthy kind of way ). I’ve not been to turkey buce but the people I’ve met from there have been white (olive skinned maybe).
Guest MattP Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 4 hours ago, Kopfkino said: Once he realises there's 8.5m votes available, man of the people Jezza will save the day with his hokey cokey Brexit and offer the students free chicken nuggets to keep them onside. We chuckle at this hokey cokey Labour Brexit but this is the actual timeline of it, just imagine if they had been running the negotiation. John McDonnell: Leave single market Tom Watson: Stay in SM & CU Jon Ashworth, Jenny Chapman: Leave SM Diane Abbott: Keep freedom of movement Corbyn, Keir Starmer: End FoM Barry Gardiner: Staying in CU a disaster Corbyn: Whips party to vote against staying in SM & CU Starmer: Stay in SM & CU It's a good job he is offering a load of free shit.
Strokes Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 4 hours ago, ealingfox said: I don't need to go anywhere near that far (which I didnt) for my statement to be true. You know that as well as I do. Do I? You seem to know a lot about what I think. Perhaps I can assume your motivations too? 1
Sharpe's Fox Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 The Democratic Unionist Party’s Brexit spokesman rubbished Labour’s Keir Starmer for being too well-prepared and knowledgeable. He told Politico that Starmer “might be clever... but that is not what you need if you are going to try and mount an effective campaign. Sometimes [you need] someone with less grasp of detail, less clever.” William Ulsterman is riled because as well as being denied his cheddar cheese and pineapple on a stick the Labour Party has unparalleled intellectual heft on the front bench
Guest Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 1 hour ago, MattP said: We chuckle at this hokey cokey Labour Brexit but this is the actual timeline of it, just imagine if they had been running the negotiation. John McDonnell: Leave single market Tom Watson: Stay in SM & CU Jon Ashworth, Jenny Chapman: Leave SM Diane Abbott: Keep freedom of movement Corbyn, Keir Starmer: End FoM Barry Gardiner: Staying in CU a disaster Corbyn: Whips party to vote against staying in SM & CU Starmer: Stay in SM & CU It's a good job he is offering a load of free shit. How many of their own red lines have the Tories crossed so far?
ealingfox Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 45 minutes ago, Strokes said: Do I? You seem to know a lot about what I think. Perhaps I can assume your motivations too? Well a lot is a bit of a leap from the one minor point I was addressing but sure, I might have given you too much credit I suppose. I suppose you could, but given your childish effort to eschew said minor point I'm not sure why it matters. What assumptions would you like to make?
Guest Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 1 hour ago, Innovindil said: I'd count them, but then we'd just get into an argument about the definition of "vast majority" and run round in circles. What if it were 52%?
Guest Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 'We can't go on like this': mood of resignation in EU as Brexit talks stutter Theresa May is ‘afraid of her own shadow’, her government is weak and Brexit is proving ‘nonsense’, observers say Theresa May in Brussels. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Jennifer Rankin in Brussels and Patrick Wintour Published:16:47 GMT+00:00 Tue 5 December 2017 Theresa May has less than a week to salvage a Brexit deal that would open the way to trade talks before the end of the year, amid increasing signs of impatience within the EU over her handling of the process. EU negotiators expect the prime minister to return to Brussels very soon, but have said time is running out to strike a deal at a European summit next week. “The show is now in London,” said the chief spokesman of the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker. “We stand ready here in the commission to resume talks with the United Kingdom at any moment in time when we get the sign that London is ready.” AdvertisementHide While the next “final” deadline for stage one has not been defined publicly, several EU sources said the deal would have to be struck by the end of the week, with either Friday or Sunday as the last resort. Five reasons why the Brexit negotiations have just got more difficult One EU ambassador told the Guardian the failure to reach a deal on Northern Ireland was a microcosm of a wider problem. “At root the problem is that [May] seems incapable of making a decision and is afraid of her own shadow,” the source said. “We cannot go on like this, with no idea what the UK wants. She just has to have the conversation with her own cabinet, and if that upsets someone, or someone resigns, so be it. She has to say what kind of trading relationship she is seeking. We cannot do it for her, and she cannot defer forever.” For weeks, European officials have walked a tightrope between sticking to the EU’s tough negotiating stance and seeking to avoid action or words that could destabilise the fragile May government. “We have to treat the UK political system like a rotten egg,” said one EU source in the run-up to Monday’s talks, suggesting that if “the realities of the world” dawned too soon, the British government could become more fragile. One MEP said the government’s weakness was “a key question” for the EU. “We are also in a very difficult position because it would not be in our interests to see the whole thing fall apart,” said Petri Sarvamaa, a Finnish centre-right MEP who is a vice-chair of the European parliament’s budgets committee. “At the same time … it’s not our duty to help the British government in a negotiation that is between them and us. “The bottom line is that the May government is facing an impossible task,” said Sarvamaa, adding that promises made to British voters during the referendum campaign and before June’s snap election could not be kept. The government was in “an ever-worsening, deteriorating cycle,” he said. “I love Britain and I hate to see what is going on. “They have to solve this thing 100% by themselves but unfortunately it looks impossible. We really don’t want to the negotiations to fall down, we don’t want the British government to fall apart, but what can we do?” Brexit negotiations: where do the talks stand? For some EU sources, the dominant mood is resignation. “The government is weak and, yes, that has created problems in many respects,” another source said. “The EU27 is conscious of these problems and is trying to help. But at the end of the day we only have one interlocutor.” EU officials are stretching their own procedures – the early preparation of summit documents – because the Irish border issue is seen as a vital question of peace, which is in a different league to the Brexit bill. Officials thought they were inches away from agreeing on Monday a text that would have paved the way for the UK to move to trade talks. While Monday’s imbroglio was relegated mostly to the inside pages of many continental newspapers, the tone was often critical. “Theresa May taken hostage at the Irish border,” was the headline in France’s leftwing standard, Libération, which described Monday’s events as a circus. Perhaps the most scathing verdict was that of the Deutschlandfunk commentator Peter Kapern, who described Brexit as “the biggest political nonsense” since the Roman emperor Caligula made his favourite horse a senator. “Anyone who needed further proof of this thesis has received it today,” he wrote. Even if an agreement on Brexit was reached in the coming days, Kapern said, Monday’s events showed “that the United Kingdom will not only leave the EU but, above all, the world stage”.
Innovindil Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 7 minutes ago, toddybad said: What if it were 52%? I'd say it was fookin massive lad and you should respect the will of the crossings.
filthyfox Posted 5 December 2017 Posted 5 December 2017 11 hours ago, toddybad said: There is absolutely no chance of a hard Brexit getting through parliament. If our politicians had any backbone they would stop thus nonsense right now. It's not good for the current or the future prosperity. 40 billion quid down the drain before you even start.
Fox Ulike Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 10 hours ago, filthyfox said: If our politicians had any backbone they would stop thus nonsense right now. It's not good for the current or the future prosperity. 40 billion quid down the drain before you even start. Not to mention what the actual Brexit process is costing us. Last year costs of the Brexit administration were put at £65m a year. http://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/brexit-could-cost-departments-£65m-year-implement-says-institute-government Legal costs were £3.7m last Summer https://www.legalbusiness.co.uk/blogs/brexit-government-department-spent-3-7m-in-legal-costs-in-year-since-eu-referendum/ Obviously there's no way that the Government will voluntarily update these figures now. And of course the other thing is the 'opportunity cost'. What are we not doing whilst Theresa May bungles around Brussels trying to square the circle. Brexit seems to have engulfed all Government business. What could the Governement be doing now if it weren't for Brexit? Clamping down on Tax avoidance. Sorting out Universal Credit. Preventing the next Grenfell disaster. Helping small businesses. Funding the NHS... And for what? Cheaper South African oranges. The freedom to eat a curved cucumber. And higher wages for lettuce pickers. The whole thing is absurd. And anyone who continues to believe that Brexit is in Britain's best interests is either a fool, or really really doesn't like foreigners. I really have no other explanation for it. 2
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 The Brexit climbdown is far from what leaving was meant to look like The agenda at Monday’s crunch meeting between Theresa May and Jean Claude-Juncker is not what voters were promised Boris Johnson and his fellow Brexiters claimed the EU would be feeling the pain by now and desperate to strike a deal. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA Dan Roberts, Brexit policy editor Published:19:27 GMT+00:00 Fri 1 December 2017 Follow Dan Roberts As the scale of the Brexit climbdown takes shape this weekend, one thing is already becoming clear: this wasn’t what leaving the EU was meant to look like. Ahead of Monday’s crunch meeting between Theresa May and commission president Jean Claude-Juncker, the comparison between what is on the table in Brussels and what voters were once promised in Britain is striking. The first disappointment is that the UK government is not even talking about the things it really wants yet. The concessions Britain is being pressed to finalise – on money, regulation and legal independence – are simply to begin the process of discussing a trade deal. The same Brexit enthusiasts who once insisted it would be ours for the taking now argue the cost is so high we need to steel ourselves for living without it. “Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy,” insisted John Redwood shortly after the June 2016 referendum. “The UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation,” he wrote. In the run up to the vote, fellow Tory cheerleader Owen Paterson promised it was “inconceivable we won’t come to a satisfactory trade deal”. Yet six weeks ago, Paterson declared it was now “inevitable” that we wouldn’t and Redwood said the door had “slammed shut”. AdvertisementHide Then there is the question of the type of trade deal that the government is working so furiously to obtain. It was long an act of faith among Brexiters that it was not necessary to be a member of the EU in order to maintain all the economic benefits. It was the central tenet of Theresa May’s Lancaster House speech, announcing in January that Britain would leave the market but retain “frictionless access”. “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market,” said the Tory MEP Daniel Hannan when the referendum was first announced. “No one has ever suggested in Brussels, and I have been here for 16 years, that if we withdrew from the union we would be excluded from the single market.” Yet the “cake-and-eat-it” position has now been comprehensively ruled out by every European leader. Two weeks ago, a leaked policy paper in Brussels made clear that unless Britain remained inside the single market, the only access to it would come via a much more limited goods trade agreement such as that the EU has with Canada. So what are we paying for this privilege already extended for free to other third party countries? Leaks this week suggest a net divorce settlement equivalent to between £53bn and £58bn (€60bn to €65bn) will be agreed on Monday. This too is in stark contrast to the promise made to voters. Most famously expressed on a big red bus in misleading gross terms of £350m a week, even the net figure was never qualified with talk of a corresponding divorce bill. “We can take back control of huge sums of money – £10.6bn net per year – and spend it on our priorities,” said Boris Johnson, long before telling the EU it could “go whistle” if it wanted an “extortionate” divorce settlement. There are other one-off surprises. Chancellor Philip Hammond just announced £3bn of new spendingto prepare Britain for exit, with thousands of new civil servants for customs and regulatory agencies, on top of £700m already spent. Though the immediate economic impact of isolation is less than some remainers feared, a recent study by the Centre for Economic Policy Research estimatedthat Britain’s slower relative growth since the referendum has already cost £20bn, or £300m a week, while Europe booms. Many non-financial concessions now look inevitable too. To reach agreement on citizens’ rights, the cabinet is said to be ready to allow UK courts to “refer up” to the European court of justice, blurring another of May’s red lines. In order to avoid a hard border between the EU and Northern Ireland, Britain is said to be considering harmonising existing local regulations indefinitely. Faced with a backlash from the DUP, who are worried about divergence from the UK mainland, it is quite possible the only answer is for the whole country to retain many existing EU regulations. Either way, it’s a long way from the claims of those like David Davis who said Brexit would end “the flood of new regulation from Europe” in a post-referendum essay for Conservative Home that now makes for uncomfortable reading. Among its many promises was the claim that Britain could also immediately strike new trade deals with other countries. Instead, prized talks with the US are overshadowed by the latest spat with Donald Trump and nothing can be implemented until at least 2021 in a transition phase. Even then, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross has made clear Britain would simply be swapping EU rules for controversial US regulations on products like chicken and beef. Another tarnished promise is that Brexit would avoid harming Britain’s cultural and diplomatic influence. “There will still be intense and intensifying European cooperation and partnership in a huge number of fields: the arts, the sciences, the universities, and on improving the environment,” wrote Johnson, with no mention of the recent news that Britain would lose its right to propose European capitals of culture. John Redwood’s boast that the “the UK will retake her seat at the top tables of the world where the EU has replaced us” also looks hollow as the UK just lost the right to appoint a judge to the international court of justice for the first time in 71 years. Similarly, he wrongly assured the City of London it had no reason to fear losing so-called passporting rights. Above all, they claimed, it would be the EU feeling the pain by now, not Britain. “The real risk is to the general morale of Europe,” wrote Johnson ahead of the referendum. “EU politicians would be banging down the door for a trade deal on Friday,” he added.
Strokes Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 41 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Not to mention what the actual Brexit process is costing us. Last year costs of the Brexit administration were put at £65m a year. http://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/brexit-could-cost-departments-£65m-year-implement-says-institute-government Legal costs were £3.7m last Summer https://www.legalbusiness.co.uk/blogs/brexit-government-department-spent-3-7m-in-legal-costs-in-year-since-eu-referendum/ Obviously there's no way that the Government will voluntarily update these figures now. And of course the other thing is the 'opportunity cost'. What are we not doing whilst Theresa May bungles around Brussels trying to square the circle. Brexit seems to have engulfed all Government business. What could the Governement be doing now if it weren't for Brexit? Clamping down on Tax avoidance. Sorting out Universal Credit. Preventing the next Grenfell disaster. Helping small businesses. Funding the NHS... And for what? Cheaper South African oranges. The freedom to eat a curved cucumber. And higher wages for lettuce pickers. The whole thing is absurd. And anyone who continues to believe that Brexit is in Britain's best interests is either a fool, or really really doesn't like foreigners. I really have no other explanation for it. Given up on the Russian bot attack for a bit have we? We must be due another round of battle bus attacks next week then. I love racism week.
Fox Ulike Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 22 minutes ago, Strokes said: Given up on the Russian bot attack for a bit have we? We must be due another round of battle bus attacks next week then. I love racism week. I'll happily debate any of those topics - if you actually have a political point to make about any of them?
Fox Ulike Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 Chancellor Philip Hammond just announced £3bn of new spending to prepare Britain for exit, with thousands of new civil servants for customs and regulatory agencies, on top of £700m already spent. Let's give it to the NHS instead. 1
Strokes Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 1 minute ago, Fox Ulike said: I'll happily debate any of those topics - if you actually have a political point to make about any of them? Its alright im not getting on the merry go round today, if you need my answers you can either scroll back three weeks or read the daily mail. 1
Guest Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Chancellor Philip Hammond just announced £3bn of new spending to prepare Britain for exit, with thousands of new civil servants for customs and regulatory agencies, on top of £700m already spent. Let's give it to the NHS instead. "Let's" as Strokes would say. It's well known short hand for let us not.
Strokes Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 On to the battle bus already, crikey the merrygo round is fast today, glad i decided to not get on.
Fox Ulike Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 8 minutes ago, Strokes said: Its alright im not getting on the merry go round today, if you need my answers you can either scroll back three weeks or read the daily mail. That's what I thought.
Fox Ulike Posted 6 December 2017 Posted 6 December 2017 7 minutes ago, toddybad said: "Let's" as Strokes would say. It's well known short hand for let us not. Good point. I imagine that "I would" can also be interpreted as "I would not..."
Recommended Posts