What's in the news?

[gw_leics772]

21 minutes ago, Milo said:

Fully agree.

 

Only if they also give away free Kainotophobia badges to all remainers, though.

 

Fairs fair. 

thanks for making me have to google.

 

Between you and @Toddybad I'm feeling right a right divock tonight ?

[urban.spaceman]

37 minutes ago, Toddybad said:

There is an element of the left that is nuts. Same as on the right. It's a bit disingenuous to claim that all Corbyn supports fall into this camp. Besides, there won't be any Corbyn supporters left if he doesn't change his Brexit policy pretty sharpish.

There is a sizeable number though that are fully crazy. I just can’t beleive what’s happened to Labour in the last few years. 

[gw_leics772]

[urban.spaceman]

 

[Toddybad]

8 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

There is a sizeable number though that are fully crazy. I just can’t beleive what’s happened to Labour in the last few years. 

I think the issue of that there is genuinely a need for a new politics. In the same way as there was at the end of the 80s. Whilst the right would hold Thatcher and neo-liberal economics up as successful, there can be little doubt that this success only appears to have helped a proportion of one generation. Privatisation sold off publicly owned infrastructure, increasing executive pay has come at the expense of the ordinary worker and property has been hoarded by over 2 million landlords with little regard for homes as homes rather than investments. There clearly needs to be a real change, not just tinkering. If the right recognised that too then there might be a centrist way forward. But it doesn't, certainly beyond meaningless slogans which aren't matched by actions.

[Milo]

13 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

There is a sizeable number though that are fully crazy. I just can’t beleive what’s happened to Labour in the last few years. 

 

 

I was having a conversation with a friend the other day who blamed all of the country's woes on Labour - saying that the Tory's have only been allowed to get away with being so shit at everything because there is no opposition.

 

it was an interesting take on it!

 

  

[urban.spaceman]

9 minutes ago, Milo said:

I was having a conversation with a friend the other day who blamed all of the country's woes on Labour - saying that the Tory's have only been allowed to get away with being so shit at everything because there is no opposition.

 

it was an interesting take on it!

It’s certainly a legitimate take. Just look at the havoc wreaked by Thatcher as noted by @Toddybad - if she’d had any sort of decent opposition, would she have got elected three times? Would she have got away with as much? 

 

 

[Wymsey]

Prince Philip behind the wheel again..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6610325/amp/Philip-rides-Duke-Edinburgh-97-wheel.html

[Foxxed]

4 hours ago, Milo said:

 

 

I was having a conversation with a friend the other day who blamed all of the country's woes on Labour - saying that the Tory's have only been allowed to get away with being so shit at everything because there is no opposition.

 

it was an interesting take on it!

 

  

I love it! Labour was the ying to their yang, and now there's only yang, far too much yang for one country to take. I might take up the same reasoning: "Yes, I drank too much and embarrassed both of us. But who let me?" To be fair, I already use that argument.

[The Guvnor]

SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: EU TO LOSE £500BN AND UK TO GAIN £640BN IN NO-DEAL BREXIT, ECONOMIST CLAIMS

 

A “no deal” outcome from the Brexit negotiations would lead to a £500 billion loss for the European Union, according to a new analysis.

A study by Patrick Minford, a professor of economics at Cardiff University, states that while a failure to reach a deal would lead to “short term nuisance” for both sides, Brussels would face a “substantial economic loss”, compared to a net gain for the UK.

Prof Minford, who chairs the Eurosceptic Economists for Free Trade group, concludes: “It could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown”.

The analysis comes after David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, complained in a letter to the Prime Minister that Brussels was damaging British interests by talking up the threat to companies if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal.

Prof Minford said: “For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

According to the analysis, the largest cost to the EU would be from paying the UK some £433 billion in tariff revenue. It would also lose around £28 billion which the UK would otherwise pay into the budget period to 2020, and a reported £10 billion contribution to longer term liabilities, as part of a financial settlement, Prof Minford concluded.

“Because its customs union with the UK would stop immediately, it would lose two years’ worth of the terms of trade gain its producers make on its balance of trade surplus with the UK- estimated at around £18 billion a year: so two years’ worth of that would be another £36 billion one-off loss,” he added.

By contrast, a breakdown in talks would lead to a “one-off gain” of £38 billion on savings in relation to the EU budget, in addition a £180 billion windfall as a result of bringing forward the “long-term gain” of “free trade, own-regulation and own-border-control” in the absence of the otherwise expected two-year implementation period for a deal.

The UK would also gain the total of £433 billion tariff revenue which Prof Minford calculated would be paid by the EU to the Treasury, he said.

He concluded: “So plus £641 billion for the UK versus minus £507 billion for the EU: it could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown. For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

 

Well it makes a change from all the doom and gloom posted by some.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: EU TO LOSE £500BN AND UK TO GAIN £640BN IN NO-DEAL BREXIT, ECONOMIST CLAIMS

 

A “no deal” outcome from the Brexit negotiations would lead to a £500 billion loss for the European Union, according to a new analysis.

A study by Patrick Minford, a professor of economics at Cardiff University, states that while a failure to reach a deal would lead to “short term nuisance” for both sides, Brussels would face a “substantial economic loss”, compared to a net gain for the UK.

Prof Minford, who chairs the Eurosceptic Economists for Free Trade group, concludes: “It could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown”.

The analysis comes after David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, complained in a letter to the Prime Minister that Brussels was damaging British interests by talking up the threat to companies if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal.

Prof Minford said: “For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

According to the analysis, the largest cost to the EU would be from paying the UK some £433 billion in tariff revenue. It would also lose around £28 billion which the UK would otherwise pay into the budget period to 2020, and a reported £10 billion contribution to longer term liabilities, as part of a financial settlement, Prof Minford concluded.

“Because its customs union with the UK would stop immediately, it would lose two years’ worth of the terms of trade gain its producers make on its balance of trade surplus with the UK- estimated at around £18 billion a year: so two years’ worth of that would be another £36 billion one-off loss,” he added.

By contrast, a breakdown in talks would lead to a “one-off gain” of £38 billion on savings in relation to the EU budget, in addition a £180 billion windfall as a result of bringing forward the “long-term gain” of “free trade, own-regulation and own-border-control” in the absence of the otherwise expected two-year implementation period for a deal.

The UK would also gain the total of £433 billion tariff revenue which Prof Minford calculated would be paid by the EU to the Treasury, he said.

He concluded: “So plus £641 billion for the UK versus minus £507 billion for the EU: it could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown. For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

 

Well it makes a change from all the doom and gloom posted by some.

Guess it depends on whether or not you think international relations should be confrontational and it's all about "winning".

[Lionator]

I've just caught up on Question Time the other night. You have a professor of European politics being shouted down for speaking the truth and a bunch of idiots cheering for Isabelle Oakeshott who hid evidence of Russian interference in the referendum. We are living in truly insane, terrifying times.

[Toddybad]

25 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: EU TO LOSE £500BN AND UK TO GAIN £640BN IN NO-DEAL BREXIT, ECONOMIST CLAIMS

 

A “no deal” outcome from the Brexit negotiations would lead to a £500 billion loss for the European Union, according to a new analysis.

A study by Patrick Minford, a professor of economics at Cardiff University, states that while a failure to reach a deal would lead to “short term nuisance” for both sides, Brussels would face a “substantial economic loss”, compared to a net gain for the UK.

Prof Minford, who chairs the Eurosceptic Economists for Free Trade group, concludes: “It could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown”.

The analysis comes after David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, complained in a letter to the Prime Minister that Brussels was damaging British interests by talking up the threat to companies if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal.

Prof Minford said: “For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

According to the analysis, the largest cost to the EU would be from paying the UK some £433 billion in tariff revenue. It would also lose around £28 billion which the UK would otherwise pay into the budget period to 2020, and a reported £10 billion contribution to longer term liabilities, as part of a financial settlement, Prof Minford concluded.

“Because its customs union with the UK would stop immediately, it would lose two years’ worth of the terms of trade gain its producers make on its balance of trade surplus with the UK- estimated at around £18 billion a year: so two years’ worth of that would be another £36 billion one-off loss,” he added.

By contrast, a breakdown in talks would lead to a “one-off gain” of £38 billion on savings in relation to the EU budget, in addition a £180 billion windfall as a result of bringing forward the “long-term gain” of “free trade, own-regulation and own-border-control” in the absence of the otherwise expected two-year implementation period for a deal.

The UK would also gain the total of £433 billion tariff revenue which Prof Minford calculated would be paid by the EU to the Treasury, he said.

He concluded: “So plus £641 billion for the UK versus minus £507 billion for the EU: it could not be more open and shut who least wants a breakdown. For the UK a breakdown would be a short term nuisance but a substantial economic gain; for the EU it is both a short term nuisance and a substantial economic loss.”

 

Well it makes a change from all the doom and gloom posted by some.

Patrick Minford is a thoroughly discredited joke. And his own paper on Brexit proposes that we would need to kill off manufacturing and farming in the UK. It's like using a quote from Sweeny Todd to promote the eating of meat pies.

Edited 20 January 2019 by Toddybad

[The Guvnor]

11 minutes ago, Toddybad said:

Patrick Minford is a thoroughly discredited joke. And his own paper on Brexit proposes that we would need to kill off manufacturing and farming in the UK. It's like using a quote from Sweeny Todd to promote the eating of meat pies.

Apparently his pies were very tasty 

[Foxxed]

At this point our best hope is a discredited economist from Cardiff. We'll soon find out anyway.

[davieG]

This may may not be true or even relevant, I don't know anymore because you can't trust anyone or any organisation so just putting it out there.

 

 

 

 

[davieG]

Brexit: High-profile Germans plead with UK to stay in EU
18 January 2019

Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and Jens Lehmann are among the letter's signatories
Leading German figures have written to the UK asking it to stay in the EU.

The letter, published in the Times, is signed by 31 people, including the leader of the Christian Democratic Union - and likely successor to Angela Merkel - Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and former Arsenal goalkeeper Jens Lehmann.

They cited post-work pints and pantomime as beloved British habits.

But the UK's role in post-war Europe is the focus of the signatories calling for Britain to stay.

"Without your great nation, this Continent would not be what it is today," they wrote.

The letter - also signed by the chief executive of Airbus, Thomas Enders, and punk singer Campino - said the UK had helped define the European Union as a community of "freedom and prosperity".

"After the horrors of the Second World War, Britain did not give up on us," it continued.

"It has welcomed Germany back as a sovereign nation and a European power.

"This we, as Germans, have not forgotten and we are grateful."

The signatories said that they "respect the choice" of British people who want to leave the EU and, if the country wants to leave for good, "it will always have friends in Germany and Europe".

But they said the choice was not irreversible and "our door will always remain open".

'Friends across the Channel'
The letter concluded: "Britain has become part of who we are as Europeans and therefore we would miss Britain.

"We would miss the legendary British black humour and going to the pub after work hours to drink an ale. We would miss tea with milk and driving on the left-hand side of the road. And we would miss seeing the panto at Christmas.

"But more than anything else, we would miss the British people - our friends across the Channel.

"Therefore Britons should know, from the bottom of our hearts, we want them to stay."

Related

[RobHawk]

4 minutes ago, davieG said:

This may may not be true or even relevant, I don't know anymore because you can't trust anyone or any organisation so just putting it out there.

 

 

 

 

Problem with that is, It's simplistic at best. 

 

The big problem in all of this is the referendum itself. I'm not gonna get into the argument about whether people knew what they were voting for, but as we have seen over the last few years, leaving the EU is complex and there is no clear consensus on what's best moving forward. 

 

The referendum simplified all of this into a simple yes/no question. There is no simple yes no solution to Brexit, so regardless of what the referendum result was, MPs have got slot more to work through.

[RODNEY FERNIO]

Complete confusion reigns on the Andrew Marr show .

[The Guvnor]

1 hour ago, Foxxed said:

At this point our best hope is a discredited economist from Cardiff. We'll soon find out anyway.

His qualifications look quite impressive, where did you read he is a discredited economist pray tell.

[lifted*fox]

2 hours ago, Toddybad said:

Patrick Minford is a thoroughly discredited joke. And his own paper on Brexit proposes that we would need to kill off manufacturing and farming in the UK. It's like using a quote from Sweeny Todd to promote the eating of meat pies.

 

absolutely. 

 

JRM was on James O'Brien's show the other day quoting Minford and James was repeatedly saying 'so you're quoting the guy who unequivocally said that Brexit would destroy British Agriculture?' and JRM refused to agree even though the evidence was there, in writing. 

 

****ing lol. We couldn't find the £350 million a week but they've magically found £640 billion now. Right-o. From a biased economist who sits on a euro-sceptic panel, reported in the right-wing Telegraph rag, no less. 

 

Doom & gloom over guys.

[Foxxed]

6 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

His qualifications look quite impressive, where did you read he is a discredited economist pray tell.

Read https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexiteers-economists-for-brexit-patrick-minford-study-doubly-misleading-eu-uk-trade-deal-tariff-a7691271.html%3famp

 

Here are some quotes:

 

Professor Winters also points out that the modelling of Minford’s group bizarrely assumes the EU will waive its standards on goods imports from the UK post-Brexit, which implies precisely the sort of deep trade deal which the Economists for Brexit have been consistently arguing that the UK does not need to bother pursuing.

 

And

 

“The term ‘unilateral free trade’ is thus doubly misleading: first, it presumes agreements with reciprocal liberalisations with the UK’s trading partners, including the EU, and second, on the EU, it is just plain wrong,” he said.

 

"Unless the UK and EU sign an FTA [Free Trade Agreement] that explicitly removes all EU non-tariff barriers to exports from the UK, WTO rules prevent the EU from eliminating barriers on the UK alone. If achieved, eliminating all tariffs and non-tariff barriers between the UK and the EU would imply deeper integration than the EU Customs Union and Single Market currently deliver, but coupled with a race to the bottom on standards!"

 

 

 

 

 

Minford is assuming, again and again, like a broken record, that we our trade with the EU will be based on 'unilaterial free trade', something he thinks will magically appear, completely and conveniently ignoring what a trading block to its members and importantly what it is not to its non members.

 

We're at the stage where Minford's blind faith and glib disregard of simple facts is our best bet. Let's wait and see what happens in the coming months.

[The Guvnor]

10 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

absolutely. 

 

JRM was on James O'Brien's show the other day quoting Minford and James was repeatedly saying 'so you're quoting the guy who unequivocally said that Brexit would destroy British Agriculture?' and JRM refused to agree even though the evidence was there, in writing. 

 

****ing lol. We couldn't find the £350 million a week but they've magically found £640 billion now. Right-o. From a biased economist who sits on a euro-sceptic panel, reported in the right-wing Telegraph rag, no less. 

 

Doom & gloom over guys.

Quite a disparaging summation there of professor Minford CBE.  And my God please not someone who would dare to have a different opinion. And as for James O'Brien I have watched his interview techniques and I found them unbelievably disrespectful.

[Foxxed]

Minford is essentially saying we don't need a trade deal with the EU but when we get it then it will be better than you could ever imagine. I admire his optimism.

[Alf Bentley]

Not often that I quote the Mail, but haven't seen any other coverage of this: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6612015/Nigel-Farage-adopts-brand-new-pro-Brexit-party.html

 

Farage endorses new party "The Brexit Party" that is currently getting registered with the Electoral Commission.

 

Probably won't greatly impact the imminent decisions in parliament. But could have a big impact if an election is called (and even over whether an election is called).

Could also have a big impact on politics, particularly electoral politics over the coming years.

 

I'm guessing that a "Brexit Party" fronted by Farage could pick up a fair few votes - mainly, but not entirely from the Tories or ex-Labour voters defecting because they strongly support Brexit.

 

Labour has its own issues with voters defecting over Brexit - some to the Tories/UKIP/Brexit Party if it opposes Brexit, many more to the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP or abstention if it supports Brexit or blocks a second referendum. Though, on Marr, Starmer sounded as if he hoped to twist Corbyn's arm into supporting a referendum if no Soft Brexit deal becomes viable soon....

 

Party politics and electoral outcomes are starting to look very uncertain, potentially quite volatile....

 

 

Edited 20 January 2019 by Alf Bentley