- Status
You are right MikeG I don't get it, I am a the daughter of a Scot and an Italian immigrant whose mother came to the UK post WW2. In Scotland where all the politicians came together apart from UKIP and actually did represent the view of the majority to remain, where we there was little or no lying in the campaign, where we see immigration as a positive, where fundamentally people believe themselves to be European and where history supporting that going back to the 1200s in the form of the auld alliance treaty with France is still part of our culture, we voted to remain.
Also look critically at your record levels of employment. The nature of employment has changed with over 800,000 people on zero hours contracts according to the office of national statistics and approximately 4.1 million people in England and Wales are in insecure work meaning they do not have fixed, regular working hours. Plus add in the way the reporting now uses a deduction of the figures of the economically inactive which is according to the office of national statistics is "The number of economically inactive people in the UK is measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and consists of people aged 16 and over without a job who have not sought work in the last 4 weeks and/or are not available to start work in the next 2 weeks. The main economically inactive groups are students, people looking after family and home, long-term sick and disabled, temporarily sick and disabled, retired people and discouraged workers" means we are no longer reporting unemployment in the way that did in the past. So like most things working out the real state of employment in the UK is more difficult as we have changed the underlying approach that is used to derive the figures.
I have a question what if the cabinet group set up to put Brexit forward cannot find the circumstances by which Brexit can be made to work. If when they start to dismantle EU and UK law , the costs of new law and policy is too high and too time consuming. I am suggesting here that the present Government will have a problem if the price of Brexit is a larger public sector. If these experts conclude that immigration cannot be controlled and that we will still need to pay a contribution to the EU. Or that the damage to the economy will be too large or that taxes will need to rise too far, or that key industries will contract, or that the costs of reskilling businesses to trade in emerging markets, costs of logistics or to protect their brands, know-how, innovations, etc by having to pay for intellectual property rights in many new territories is too high. What do we expect MPs to do if any of this info comes to parliament.
That isn't info, that is opinion. The politicians job now is to obey the instructions of the referendum result and negotiate the best deal they can. The civil servants job is to enable that, and to enact that. However unpalatable this decision might be, it's done. Over. Decided. Now, we just have to find a way of making it work.
Last edited:
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
Well ...
http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/04/news/economy/uk-brexit-corporate-tax/index.html
So now speaks of a 5% cut on corporate tax...
Money given as a gift has to be taken somewhere. So either more borrowing at higher cost (rating was cut) or cut on services, probably a combo of both. The alternative is that due to less economical attractiveness company leaves for continental Europe , some smaller one might simply plainly fold.
Either way, it does not bode well.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/04/news/economy/uk-brexit-corporate-tax/index.html
So now speaks of a 5% cut on corporate tax...
Money given as a gift has to be taken somewhere. So either more borrowing at higher cost (rating was cut) or cut on services, probably a combo of both. The alternative is that due to less economical attractiveness company leaves for continental Europe , some smaller one might simply plainly fold.
Either way, it does not bode well.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
That is not an opinion but presented as a possible scenario.
Huh? No, the official government line has always been that it was best to remain in the EU. Why would they be singing the praises of exit? Unless you're meaning to suggest that Boris speaks on behalf of the government of which he isn't really a member (he attends Cabinet without being a minister).
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
Yeah righto. 52% of Britain's population is insane. I guess that a third of the French population is insane too.
Did you read what I psoted or are you intentionally misrepresenting what Mchornzi and I said ?
It was clearly the people who campaigned and lied to the UK public which were insane.
But you keep going back as if we pretended the 52% were insane.
By that point I get the feeling you are either trying to poison the well , or jsut plain trolling.
None of that scenario contained anything other than opinion:
"damage too large"....."taxes rise too much"......."costs too high"....."too time consuming".......
All matters of opinion, not fact.
Competing on price is typically reserved to those who can't offer anything substantial. Seeing as UK already has some of the lowest corporate rates in the world, it can only be interpreted as getting outright desperate. There's a reason why I call Brexit leaders insane and use Brexitard to describe their club.
McHrozni
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
Again : READ. It starts by an "if when" which makes it clearly hypothetical. EVen the second sentences has an if, and there are a lot of implied ifs.
If you want to skim do it, but when pointed out that you are not reading correctly, but re-read the post more carefully and try to see if you really understood it out. Even the last sentence has an hypothetical if.
I understand that English is your second language, but your post was not clear. Even now, it isn't obvious to me that you meant only the Brexit advocates were insane. If I misunderstood your point, I apologise. However, you miss the point that the leaders of the Brexit campaign weren't so much leaders as followers, tapping into enormous ill-feeling towards the EU in this country. By suggesting they are insane you implicate the people for whom they were working: the half of the population that had had enough of the EU.
It's a pretty weak thing to accuse opponents of trolling, and I'm not sure the mods take too kindly too it.
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
From the link:
WTF? BJ is gazing at some reality that is of his and his cohorts own imagination. There will be no free ride, Boris. No zero tariffs, and no rights except those that pertain equally to all complete outsiders.
Trumpians: The world will bend to my will; reality is and will be as I say. If not, someone else is lying/cheating. I am right, I will always be right, and I will stamp my feet and scream until someone brings me an ice cream cone and tells me I am right. About everything. Always.
Brexiters: Yeah, what they said. Er, freedom! Uh, free trade! Blowing stuff up is fun, especially if it took decades to build. (Psst, btw what was the EU, what is free trade, how does it work, and who will play with me now? Quick, I just won an election!)
The hypothetical scenario contained hypothetical excuses for not-implementing Brexit. None of those hypothetical excuses were hypothetically "facts", they were all matters of opinion.
And hasn't Boris shown what a huge sense of entitlement he has. It is apparently him that has been betrayed by Gove because .....well because everyone should have known it was Boris's turn as PM!
You do realize he explicitly said so several times, right?
What more do you need to be convinced?
McHrozni
No a civil servants job is to give the politicians the information around specific policy requests with no political bias. It is up to the politicians then to determine policy based on that information and to set operational directives. It can also be argued and I am sure some civil servants may already arguing this that there is no legal requirement for the referendum result to be considered binding apart from political reasons which they are expressly not able to consider. Therefore, the parliament needs to take the decisions on each Brexit strand based on the information available from each department in terms of policy, legal requirements, operational timescales and delivery approaches and costs. Therefore there is always the possibility that they cannot make it work, every civil servant can tell the tale of Ministers and politicians who wanted something to happen until one of the above came into play. We even had a whole television series based on this in years gone by called Yes Minister and then Yes Prime Minister.
Last edited:
Agree 100%. None of which, despite your first word, contradicts anything I said.
- Status