I see Brian Harvey has gone proper radio...

[IUFG]

I thought that cap was a tin-foil hat at first :hehe:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/6797123/brian-harvey-east-17-youtube-worrying-prisoner/

[7sisters]

That’s what happens when you spend endless evenings on the marching powder with Danielle Westbrook I’m afraid..
Sadly, It’s probably too late for her to try C’s bugle cleaner..

[Sir C]

I thought that cap was a tin-foil hat at first :hehe:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/6797123/brian-harvey-east-17-youtube-worrying-prisoner/

That's pretty bonkers, it must be said.

Still saner than Soubry, mind.

[Monty92]

That's pretty bonkers, it must be said.

Still saner than Soubry, mind.

The thing is, Soubry wants the Norway model, which isn't *completely* bonkers.

[Sir C]

The thing is, Soubry wants the Norway model, which isn't *completely* bonkers.

That's the point though. I have been unable to establish what she wants (and I congratulate you for having done so) as I am unable to decipher her meaning through the shrill, hectoring paranoid nonsense she foghorns out every time she speaks.

If you look for a definition of 'indefatigable termagant' you will find her name together with a picture of Jess Philips.

[Monty92]

That's the point though. I have been unable to establish what she wants (and I congratulate you for having done so) as I am unable to decipher her meaning through the shrill, hectoring paranoid nonsense she foghorns out every time she speaks.

If you look for a definition of 'indefatigable termagant' you will find her name together with a picture of Jess Philips.

Yeah, it's leeetle beeet of a shame that she's portrayed as such due to her theatrical performances in Parliament, when she infact holds a pretty moderate position (certainly compared with yer Adonises et al) and, as far as I know, has never called for Brexit to be scrapped or even for a second ref.

The one thing she does always say that annoys me is "no-one voted to be poorer", which is annoying as they demonstrably did.

[WES]

Yeah, it's leeetle beeet of a shame that she's portrayed as such due to her theatrical performances in Parliament, when she infact holds a pretty moderate position (certainly compared with yer Adonises et al) and, as far as I know, has never called for Brexit to be scrapped or even for a second ref.

The one thing she does always say that annoys me is "no-one voted to be poorer", which is annoying as they demonstrably did.

No they didn't - they voted for a less certain short term future in the hope that the long term future would be better and more philosophically aligned with their views of how the country should be run.

Other than the old people who voted to keep out the *inevitable* onslaught of swarthy looking people into their bucolic villages, of course.

[Burney]

Yeah, it's leeetle beeet of a shame that she's portrayed as such due to her theatrical performances in Parliament, when she infact holds a pretty moderate position (certainly compared with yer Adonises et al) and, as far as I know, has never called for Brexit to be scrapped or even for a second ref.

The one thing she does always say that annoys me is "no-one voted to be poorer", which is annoying as they demonstrably did.

On the other hand, she was on Today this morning calling for a 'Government of National Unity', which would seem to me to be a gross betrayal of the Party and voters she purports to represent. Meanwhile, of course, the ERG - who are actually seeking to ensure the Government sticks to its manifesto pledges - are described as 'rebels'. Go figure.

[Mellisa_Dou]

That's pretty

essay-company.com (https://essay-company.com/) provides quality writing help service at affordable cost in a wide range of subject areas for all grade levels, team of highly skilled and experienced assignment writer, plagiarism free work, 24x7 availability of customer support, guaranteed on time delivery.

[Monty92]

No they didn't - they voted for a less certain short term future in the hope that the long term future would be better and more philosophically aligned with their views of how the country should be run.

Other than the old people who voted to keep out the *inevitable* onslaught of swarthy looking people into their bucolic villages, of course.

Yes, they voted in the knowledge that there may be a detrimental short-to-medium term economic impact, or to put it another way, "to be poorer"

[Pokster]

Yes, they voted in the knowledge that there may be a detrimental short-to-medium term economic impact, or to put it another way, "to be poorer"

Excuse me, how do you know what they voted for ? Not everyone will be poorer by Brexit, so stop generalisations as it does nothing for your reasoning

[Sir C]

On the other hand, she was on Today this morning calling for a 'Government of National Unity', which would seem to me to be a gross betrayal of the Party and voters she purports to represent. Meanwhile, of course, the ERG - who are actually seeking to ensure the Government sticks to its manifesto pledges - are described as 'rebels'. Go figure.

God, I can't bear to listen to it any more. I'm firmly fingers-in-ears-i-can't-hear-you.

Pretty soon it will all work out one way or another. The sun will continue to rise and set, life will go on.

Everyone needs to take a step back and just... breathe.

[Monty92]

Excuse me, how do you know what they voted for ? Not everyone will be poorer by Brexit, so stop generalisations as it does nothing for your reasoning

It shouldn't be necessary to have to qualify that when you use the pronoun "they" you don't necessarily actually mean "everyone"

[Burney]

Yes, they voted in the knowledge that there may be a detrimental short-to-medium term economic impact, or to put it another way, "to be poorer"

Careful, m. You're in danger of ascribing intellectual agency to Leave voters. There'll be someone along to tell you an anecdote about their sister-in-law that proves they're all idiots any minute.

[Pokster]

It shouldn't be necessary to have to qualify that when you use the pronoun "they" you don't necessarily actually mean "everyone"

So it was a crap generalisation that has no merit whatsoever... wd m

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Careful, m. You're in danger of ascribing intellectual agency to Leave voters. There'll be someone along to tell you an anecdote about their sister-in-law that proves they're all idiots any minute.

Or one about their parents.

[Burney]

God, I can't bear to listen to it any more. I'm firmly fingers-in-ears-i-can't-hear-you.

Pretty soon it will all work out one way or another. The sun will continue to rise and set, life will go on.

Everyone needs to take a step back and just... breathe.

Rees-Mogg and Baker have played a bit of a blinder, though. I do wish Jacob weren't so attached to double-breasted suits, though. They really don't suit thin, rangy men.

[Monty92]

Rees-Mogg and Baker have played a bit of a blinder, though. I do wish Jacob weren't so attached to double-breasted suits, though. They really don't suit thin, rangy men.

Surely May is only conceding ground to them because when push comes to shove she knows she can rely on Parliament voting for whatever deal she brings back, because the alternative will be No Deal?

Or does the Parliamentary arithmetic not back that up?

[Sir C]

Rees-Mogg and Baker have played a bit of a blinder, though. I do wish Jacob weren't so attached to double-breasted suits, though. They really don't suit thin, rangy men.

I'm guessing that suit was built for his grandfather, and will last another 3 or 4 generations.

[Sir C]

Or one about their parents.

My parents didn't vote at all, but then they're pretty much brain dead anyway.

[Burney]

Or one about their parents.

I mentioned my parents' feelings as exemplifying the fact that there were many, many, many different reasons why people voted Remain. The specific purpose was to make clear that they were not symptomatic or emblematic of anyone else and that generalisations were idiotic.

Your anecdote, on the other hand, was explicitly about the only leave voter you knew and was meant to suggest that huge numbers of Leave voters were idiots who had no idea what they were doing. In fact, all it actually served to demonstrate was the narrow range of political opinion in your social circle. Echo chamber thinking, in other words.

[Burney]

Surely May is only conceding ground to them because when push comes to shove she knows she can rely on Parliament voting for whatever deal she brings back, because the alternative will be No Deal?

Or does the Parliamentary arithmetic not back that up?

You think Labour will back a deal rather than take the opportunity to bring down the government? Why? They haven't so far.

Equally, the ERG increasingly sees No Deal as the least worst option and it's looking like a deal isn't possible. Largely unnoticed the other day, the ERG slipped in an amendment to the Chequers Bill that effectively destroys the backstop clause for Northern Ireland, regarded as the guarantee there’ll be no hard border with the Republic. If that's the case, all bets are off. That would put in jeopardy the entire Withdrawal Agreement - which if it collapsed would mean a no-deal Brexit becomes virtually certain.

[Monty92]

You think Labour will back a deal rather than take the opportunity to bring down the government? Why? They haven't so far.

Equally, the ERG increasingly sees No Deal as the least worst option and it's looking like a deal isn't possible. Largely unnoticed the other day, the ERG slipped in an amendment to the Chequers Bill that effectively destroys the backstop clause for Northern Ireland, regarded as the guarantee there’ll be no hard border with the Republic. If that's the case, all bets are off. That would put in jeopardy the entire Withdrawal Agreement - which if it collapsed would mean a no-deal Brexit becomes virtually certain.

But wouldn't Labour be relying on Tory rebels to get the numbers required to vote down the deal? This is where my Parliamentary arithmetic fails me...

[Burney]

But wouldn't Labour be relying on Tory rebels to get the numbers required to vote down the deal? This is where my Parliamentary arithmetic fails me...

Of course, but why would that bother them? The ERG has shown it's better organised, better led and more committed than the Remain rebels. If you think it'll back down if offered an unsatisfactory fait accompli deal, I suspect you're mistaken.

[Monty92]

Of course, but why would that bother them? The ERG has shown it's better organised, better led and more committed than the Remain rebels. If you think it'll back down if offered an unsatisfactory fait accompli deal, I suspect you're mistaken.
.
Yes, but what both have in common is a refusal to push things far enough to risk a GE.

Which can only be achieved by concessions on both sides and the ERG falling into line come the vote.

[Peter]

It shouldn't be necessary to have to qualify that when you use the pronoun "they" you don't necessarily actually mean "everyone"

So your point is that some people did vote to be poorer.

Or maybe some people voted for other people to be poorer?

[Burney]

.
Yes, but what both have in common is a refusal to push things far enough to risk a GE.

Which can only be achieved by concessions on both sides and the ERG falling into line come the vote.

The ERG has only just started to flex its muscles, though. And it has the party membership behind them. May is now effectively their hostage.
Bear in mind also that Eurosceptics have been nurturing their grievances for decades and that theirs is an ideological position. They’re not going to back down just because they’re threatened with a GE by a PM they despise.

[Monty92]

So your point is that some people did vote to be poorer.

Or maybe some people voted for other people to be poorer?

My point is that Soubry and her fellow remainers (including the entire global political and economic establishment) spent the entire campaign telling people that leaving would make them poorer.

Even if they didn't understand the precise reasons why, we can surely assume they understood the basic concept of leaving making them poorer.

So it seems odd for her to then come out and say "people didn't vote to be poorer" :shrug:

[Peter]

My point is that Soubry and her fellow remainers (including the entire global political and economic establishment) spent the entire campaign telling people that leaving would make them poorer.

Even if they didn't understand the precise reasons why, we can surely assume they understood the basic concept of leaving making them poorer.

So it seems odd for her to then come out and say "people didn't vote to be poorer" :shrug:

Fair enough. We dont know why they voted the way they did but we do know the information they were given.

We cant say they voted to be poorer anymore than she can claim that none of them did.

Of course, we dont actually want to be poorer.

[IUFG]

Fair enough. We dont know why they voted the way they did but we do know the information they were given.

We cant say they voted to be poorer anymore than she can claim that none of them did.

Of course, we dont actually want to be poorer.

ironically, if we remain/ed we'll get to vote on approximately the square root of fúck all on all matters that the EU want to impose.

[Monty92]

Fair enough. We dont know why they voted the way they did but we do know the information they were given.

We cant say they voted to be poorer anymore than she can claim that none of them did.

Of course, we dont actually want to be poorer.

What about people who favour higher taxes? They want to be poorer, in a very real sense :shrug:

[Peter]

What about people who favour higher taxes? They want to be poorer, in a very real sense :shrug:

Poorer in the immediate sense, but they believe richer in the broader sense.

Hardly anybody votes for higher income taxes these days....its all about indirect taxation now.

[Monty92]

Poorer in the immediate sense, but they believe richer in the broader sense.

Hardly anybody votes for higher income taxes these days....its all about indirect taxation now.

Poorer in the 'less f*cking money' sense. The same sense that Soubry means it.

You said no-one wants to be poorer. This is demonstrably untrue.

[Peter]

Poorer in the 'less f*cking money' sense. The same sense that Soubry means it.

You said no-one wants to be poorer. This is demonstrably untrue.

I said we dont want to be poorer.

I dont think that is what she meant. As I understood it she was talking about the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. THat is a poorer society, not one with greater public spending arising from higher taxation. THey are very different things.

[Monty92]

I said we dont want to be poorer.

I dont think that is what she meant. As I understood it she was talking about the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. THat is a poorer society, not one with greater public spending arising from higher taxation. THey are very different things.

:clap: Some impressive goalpost shifting there.

I know it's my birthday, but you're a bellend

[7sisters]

I said we dont want to be poorer.



I dont think that is what she meant. As I understood it she was talking about the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. THat is a poorer society, not one with greater public spending arising from higher taxation. THey are very different things.

And yet. Despite being two years into this seesaw process, the markets continue to ignore the political process and those within it from all sides, by continuing along its merry way.

According to the Office of National Statistics (ONS) unemployment fell by 12,000 to 1.41 million in the quarter to May giving a jobless rate of just 4.2 per cent.

At the same time employment increased by 137,000 in the quarter to May to 32.4 million, the highest figure since records began in 1971, giving a record rate of 75.7 per cent.

Job vacancies increased by 7,000 to 824,000 - the most since records began in 2001.

Average earnings also increased by 2.5 per cent in the year to May, co

No one on either side really knows . The markets will always find their own way..

[Peter]

:clap: Some impressive goalpost shifting there.

I know it's my birthday, but you're a bellend

I am not going to say anything nasty to you on your birthday.

Will you be around tomorrow? :)