The mythical 'alternative arrangements' will fix it.
Can't believe this charlatan will be PM.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Can't believe this charlatan will be PM.
Our charlatan is worse than yours.
This might sounds strange, but at least your charlatan is honest in that he has picked a side and is true to that side. Our charlatan flipflops so much not sure even people on his side believe he's their guy.
And so it should be.
Yes, an opportunity for Tories to vote themselves out of government along with those hard Brexit Labour MPs voting to stop the thing they desperately want.
It’s a slim chance.
A good way off the deadline yet. Don't forget May's deal is still on the table, and if a hard brexit is to be avoided parliament will have to vote for something, and I still think that at the last minute the existing negotiated deal might be it. Depends on Corbyn really, if he does nothing then a hard brexit it is, although there could be a Labour rebellion, or even better he allows a free vote and the deals through.
The vote only happens though if the PM allows it to happen. Does Boris allow a whipped vote on May’s deal after all the time he spent attacking it and promoting no deal as a viable option? Maybe, if he truly understand that no deal would be disasterous, but it would surely make him look very weak and make those who opposed May look like giant hypocrites and fools.
It would yes. Hopefully both leaders will drop the whips and allow a free vote, it might be in their own interests to do so. Or indicative votes could raise their head again?
Not sure it would have a chance at passing with a free vote.
If the choice were the negotiated deal or do nothing and hard brexit then enough Labour MPs might go for it I think. There's also the chance of another referendum but MPs just don't seem to be going for that one in any numbers.
Tory hopefuls under fire for accepting cash from company linked to major ‘climate science denial’ group. Johnson has yet to declare the funding, ‘raising questions about who else is bankrolling him’:OpenDemocracy said:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/da...s-big-donation-boris-johnson-and-jeremy-hunt/
The 75 vote was reversed in 2016.
We had one in 2016, remember? It was in a few newspapers. Maybe you missed it?
What's that saying about the definition of madness, "keep doing the same thing and getting the same result but each time hoping it will change"?
There has been, and in truth, only ever has been two outcomes after the referendum; a 'no deal' or as some prefer to say a 'managed hard Brexit' or to revoke A50, on or before 29th March and stay. Mrs May as a Remainer in Leave clothing, had a perfect opportunity after her negotiated deal had been kicked into touch by Parliament thrice, to say "I've done my best, Parliament is dead-locked so I am going for the status-quo and I'm revoking A50 and also standing down as leader and PM".
The whole concept of a possible negotiated deal was a con! The EU had no intention of including any future Trade Deal in tandem with the withdrawal agreement until the UK had left the EU, and repeatedly said so! What is more all politicians knew this to be the case, be they remain or leave.
A second referendum solves nothing, even a GE will solve nothing, we either stay or go out with No deal! Politicians will twist and turn and Boris is fantastic at that, but the fact is the UK is stuck in a version of Groundhog-day, until one or other of the binary choices given us in the 2016 referendum is implemented.
The current front benches of both main parties are now 'toast' whatever the outcome. They are all looking increasingly like yesterdays men and women; choosing the new Tory leader is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Matt Hancock and some of his contemporaries on the Labour side would do well to keep their powder dry, out of the firing line and keep selling the future and convince the electorate they are the safe (albeit young) pair of hands to handle the future... good luck with that Matt, it may come around sooner than you think!
Well I did say another referendum, which does kind of acknowledge the fact that we'd already had one, if you think about it.
You could have made your point better without the sarcasm fail.
Last edited:
Raab says, if he were prime minister, he would have an emergency budget involving tax cuts to prepare the country for no-deal.
Damned Brexiteers scaremongering again.
- Raab says he would prepare for no-deal by passing tax cuts in an emergency budget.
Damned Brexiteers scaremongering again.
Tax cuts are supposed to prepare the country for a sudden huge drop in tax revenue? These people are fecking morons. It’s like conservatives only have a hammer and see everything as a nail.
That drop in revenue is the biggest factor in Brexit for me. The Tories sold off most of what was saleable under Thatcher, and some that shouldn't have been, the only way they can reduce taxes now is by borrowing. Ten years of steady austerity to bring government spending more in line with government income and it's going to be out of the window overnight.
That is true, but its the big lie that both sides propagate ( I am assuming we are talking about Government revenues here?). We have just been told that despite the threat of Brexit something in the region of £1.5 trillion of investment has flown in the UK recently, as against 900B in Germany and around 700B in France. Hence leavers will point to this and say "see if investment holds up then everything else holds up, tax intake will be higher after Brexit". Remainer's will say "even if that is true the such revenues do not find their way down the chain these days... the famous (or should it be infamous) 'trickle down' concept no longer works." This is mainly because we have an unbalanced economy in the UK we need the 'width', as it were, of the EU to balance that effect i.e in the EU as a block, the UK leads in Financial Services, Germany in manufacturing, France mainly agriculture, Italy some agriculture and soft manufacturing... etc. together they provide a balanced economy for the EU as a whole... or would do if every country was in the Euro"
Unfortunately its not, there is a euro zone (group of nations within the EU) which must move swiftly towards a unified State, i.e. the United States of Europe. The UK at present will never go there and so until there is a very clear majority in favour we will have to take whatever hit comes our way. The hit is unlikely to be too hard on the Financial services sector, but will affect our smaller trading areas, but overall revenues to the Tax man will rise, its just what will the new PM do with it?
True but the government will be recuperating tax from people buying food and other goods which they didn't pay tax on before (tariffs) - the turkeys who voted for Xmas will be paying it, rich and poor alike, well done Brexiteers, keep cheering for no deal.
What makes you so sure that the financial services sector will come out relatively unscathed?
The pound (sterling) and the trading rates in London are better than anywhere else. The 'bull-s**t propaganda is left to the politicians, the world still turns with or without Brexit, especially in financial services (so I am assured by a friend who makes his living down there... a nice one too!)
Speechless. Party has gone insane.
Nice to see it isn’t just American parties that care more about themselves and the opposition losing than they do about the wellbeing of the country.
Assuming financial services don't suffer (highly dubious imo), you do know that less than 7% of UK economic output are financial services.
Last edited:
'Corbyn: He's coming to take away what we've stolen from you.'
the best part is how getting rid of the army gets lower billing than renationalising water
The funny thing is, in the true sense of the phrase, no-deal means remain - as in, no deal has been agreed and so we go back to the status quo.
Hold on, so they are saying of those that wanted to remain, most would be happy to leave with no deal now? 
I call bullshit
I call bullshit
So...Conservative members, by a shade, would rather maintain a Union with NI than with Scotland.
for sure - I think many would be flexible on the unionist part once they realized thatSo...Conservative members, by a shade, would rather maintain a Union with NI than with Scotland.
im actually surprised they dont
Yes that's probably correct tbh I don't know the exact figures, I am going off what my friend tells me (like lots of others I suspect over Brexit issues!!).
The point is the main UK hub of financial services is London and the SE and they will continue to do alright. It's the fact that outside of London (and to some extent all other major cities) in the UK many areas are in a poor shape and its one of the reasons, towns and shires voted Brexit. The redistribution of support (structural funding) in many areas outside the main cities, from the EU, has been patchy and in many cases totally inappropriate because of the loss of major industrial interests over a period of time. The degradation actually predates the UK joining the EEC, e.g. when 'king cotton' as it was called in the North West started to disappear in the 1960's, the UK joining the EEC helped initially but it was all short term funding and when that ran out the weeds started to grow again all over former industrial landscapes. The truth is neither UK Governments nor the EU have done anything of significance, partly because the position in the UK was not as dire as in other EU countries and partly because successive governments in the UK have done nothing, Labour or Tory. In terms of voting, Labour took its heartlands for granted and knew that they didn't count the vote they weighed it in many (stalwart) constituencies and assumed it would always be there, so didn't bother redirecting resources; for exactly opposite reasons, i.e. these areas would always vote labour, the Tories, wouldn't invest either, preferring to concentrate its resource on the marginals and the home counties of course.
Many people in my neck of the woods don't see the future in the EU, because in truth in 40 years nothing much has changed, if anything the outlook for younger people is dire. Even the so called helpful Trade Union Rights from the EU have done nothing to help in labour heartlands, because there was never any real post war investment, certainly not enough to offset the industrial decline. The only hope these areas have is to force major developments outside of London, not rely on sending money to the EU for it then to come back, with strings, but to grab our own government by the throat and apply pressure. The problem is both major parties have interests in not seeing this happen. Politics at Westminster will changed whatever happens to Brexit and both major parties will only have themselves to blame.
Sorry this response got a lot longer than it was intended to be, but in answer to your question, safeguarding the financial serves sector is not the answer!
Last edited:
For sure the main investment is in and around London. But hasn't this been the case for many a year. Countries and times evolve and have to adjust to the new world as it evolves. The cotton industry died long ago.
Take Sunderland and Swindon as examples which were mining and railway areas, industry evolved and those industries were replaced by the car industries and now as a direct result of voting Brexit those industries will now disappear to be replaced by who knows what.
The UK has evolved from a major manufacturing country to a more service based economy. Figures suggest that the UK has a very low unemployment rate which is contradictory to the notion that people have no work.
When people vote for change they normally expect something better to happen. Nothing suggests that voting as they did will make things better.
To invest and make things better, the question is who is willing to pay for it and do the people trust those responsible with their money.
People have work but it's a lot less secure than it was before - redundancies are remarkably common and as automation advances a lot of career choices will become less stable than they used to be. Additionally what people are making from work isn't allowing them to buy property and other things work is supposed to be able to allow you to do, and so there's a lot more anxiety and uncertainty than in past decades. Even though they amount for a fairly small percentage of the working population things like zero hour contracts fall into that as well.
Just curious... Are there statistics on your “underemployment” rate?