UK Politics: This Country is Going to the Moggs

[BigFatCoward]

Earlier to my last re the derisory 2% pay rise, its actually only 1%, as last year we got a 1% bonus which made up the 2%.  Utter utter bastards.

I hate Jeremy Hunt, but him mistakenly calling his wife Japanese when she is Chinese is not a thing, I've called my wife by the wrong name before.

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Some more fun No-Deal scenarios. Don't worry it's just about food, so nothing essential.

[Werthead]

6 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Some more fun No-Deal scenarios. Don't worry it's just about food, so nothing essential.

Once Brexit takes place, the Brexiteers will feast on Remoaners instead. They'll be like the Cannibal Hunger Games, or the Tenescowri from the Malazan novels.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

20 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Once Brexit takes place, the Brexiteers will feast on Remoaners instead. They'll be like the Cannibal Hunger Games, or the Tenescowri from the Malazan novels.

I'd go for Boris first, one Boris can feed an English family for a week at least. A Mogg however consists merely of skin, bones and smugness, that will hardly be enough to feed a single middle class Briton. Maybe you can use him as fire material, when you have no dry wood. 

Anyway, on an equal silly note. I think you have to admire the adequate amount of food bit, the UK produces 60% (give or take) of its food, right? So I am curious whether that 60% amounts to the recommendation of the UN World Food Programme.  It's certainly one way to tackle obesity - which in the longer run will reduce the need for insulin (less type 2 diabetes).

[Blue Roses]

I see ( or rather don't see and just infer) that JC has retired to his garden shed, no doubt to read up on Venezuelan property prices and retirement villages, as his 'dear me, I just keep happening to bump into these anti-semetics on stage and in committees but I'm completely blameless and really don't know what they are gong on about as I'm a cuddly grandpa and not a racist in anyway.....oh....look at that unicorn over there' routine is leaking more than the Lusitania. 

Meanwhile the Momentum's party of Judea has decided to split from the Judean Momentum's Party over alleged or possibly alleged or not really alleged accusations of what have the Jews ever done for us? 

Its a crazy world when Monty Python looks more sane.

 

 

[Werthead]

The creator of the term "omnishambles" weighs in on the Brexit mess and his conclusion that a referendum on the final deal is the only way forwards.

[Werthead]

Esther McVey apparently launching a £200,000 study to see if austerity has made people suffer.

I fear for the sanity and common sense of people in this government.

[SeanF]

On 8/2/2018 at 6:48 PM, Werthead said:

The creator of the term "omnishambles" weighs in on the Brexit mess and his conclusion that a referendum on the final deal is the only way forwards.

Such a referendum may not go the way that you want it to go.

[Which Tyler]

What? An accurate indication of the will of the people based on accurate information?

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

What? An accurate indication of the will of the people based on accurate information?

it will be a either a narrow majority in favour, or a narrow majority against.

[A wilding]

... Accurate information like punishment budgets, Project Fear and 350 million extra per week for the NHS?

[The BlackBear]

I was under the impression polls for leave/remain have not moved in any meaningful way.

[mormont]

13 hours ago, SeanF said:

Such a referendum may not go the way that you want it to go.

Maybe. But it would surely be preferable to the government taking us into a No Deal Brexit purely because they're so arrogant that they prefer inflicting disaster on the country (and blaming it on the EU) to admitting that the things Brexiteers promised were always impossible,

[Werthead]

16 hours ago, SeanF said:

Such a referendum may not go the way that you want it to go.

If the majority vote for a hard Brexit, the cliff-edge, the financial impoverishment of this nation for a decade or more to come and the loss of this country's position in the world, then at least the government will have a clear mandate for doing so.

However, it is clear that the majority of people in this country favour a reasonable, moderate or indeed soft Brexit (combining the 48% who voted against it with those who voted in favour of a Brexit with a negotiated deal or settlement, which certainly is more than 5% of those who voted in favour, probably a lot more) over a no-deal scenario. A referendum on that, not a second blank cheque referendum with absolutely no detail on what either "remain" or "leave" means, is certainly viable.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

5 hours ago, mormont said:

Maybe. But it would surely be preferable to the government taking us into a No Deal Brexit purely because they're so arrogant that they prefer inflicting disaster on the country (and blaming it on the EU) to admitting that the things Brexiteers promised were always impossible,

I don't think it's unwillingness to admit they are wrong. 

Fox, the squinting toillette brush Gove and Hunt are ideologues. They want to disallign the UK from Europe in order to allign the UK (more) closely with the US. Of course they will engage in the blame (aka it's the EU's fault that the 27 states are not willing to bend over backwards to accomondate the UK and give it its rightful unicorns). Whether it's a disaster for the country (countries?  ), that is really just a secondary concern, if it is one at all for them.

But on one thing, he is correct, atm I think the UK is on course for a no-deal Brexit. The EU won't offer unicorns, and May can't move towards an acceptable offer. 

[mormont]

2 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I don't think it's unwillingness to admit they are wrong. 

Some of 'them' were not Leave campaigners, so no, it's not unwillingness to accept that 'they' were wrong, and if you read my post you'd notice I didn't say that it was.

It is, as you note, worse than that. For some it's an ideological Brexit-at-all-costs mentality. But for others, like Theresa May, it's an unwillingness to confront the electorate with hard truths, because they know the public will shoot the messenger. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

4 minutes ago, mormont said:

Some of 'them' were not Leave campaigners, so no, it's not unwillingness to accept that 'they' were wrong, and if you read my post you'd notice I didn't say that it was.

It is, as you note, worse than that. For some it's an ideological Brexit-at-all-costs mentality. But for others, like Theresa May, it's an unwillingness to confront the electorate with hard truths, because they know the public will shoot the messenger. 

You wrote too arrogant to come out and rather wreck havoc over the UK. I am not sure arrogant is the right wohrd, they're ideologically deluded enough, that they might think it's for the better, at least long term.

Yes, I agree, that it's not all of them. But since you quoted Fox, I felt like that group had to be addressed. 

Of course there are different actors like BoJo, who thinks all politicians are compulsive gamblers, and for him as Winston Churchill reincarnate Brexit was the horse he bet on to eventually become PM in some dystopian future.

Then we have the Mays who are unable/unwilling to present the hard truths to the electorate - not that I think that it would make much of a difference, as that would be dismissed as project fear 2.0. Or what not. You can put Labour's Starmer into that category, too.

Then we have the Corbyn's, who don't seem to fully comprehend what is going to happen, or doesn't want to know (a bit like a Labour version of David Davis). For him this more like a freeride to number 10. In that sense he is a bit like BoJo, the BoZo, or maybe like May.

Then we have future PM JRM, who I suspect is actually in it as a means to make money. As in one of his funds betting on Brexit and devaluation of the pound, and everything that goes with it. Thus I actually believe he has no appetite to become PM, as that would probably recquire him to divest from those companies. Influencing policies from the backbenches is way more profitable. Also, Brexit might hopefully  put an end to the pesky ATAD.

[DaveSumm]

Would the debate about how to even phrase a referendum on a final deal even get settled? If you make it a straight ‘yes/no’ on a set agreement, you’re opening the door to a never ending Brexit where people constantly vote ‘no’ to whatever deal is on the table this time. If you add in a ‘no and let’s scrap Brexit’ option alongside ‘yes’ and ‘no, keep trying’ to avoid that, then you essentially have a re-run of the original vote except with 33% now being the bar to clear for Remainers as opposed to 50%. Leavers won’t stand for that for a second.

[Werthead]

55 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

Would the debate about how to even phrase a referendum on a final deal even get settled? If you make it a straight ‘yes/no’ on a set agreement, you’re opening the door to a never ending Brexit where people constantly vote ‘no’ to whatever deal is on the table this time. If you add in a ‘no and let’s scrap Brexit’ option alongside ‘yes’ and ‘no, keep trying’ to avoid that, then you essentially have a re-run of the original vote except with 33% now being the bar to clear for Remainers as opposed to 50%. Leavers won’t stand for that for a second.

It should also be pointed out that 33% would also be the bar to clear for "No Deal", which you'd like to think is too high, but I'm not sure it is (whereas 51% is definitely too high for that crowd). My actual suspicion is "Brexit with a Deal" would win fairly handily in that event. If there was a feeling that the Remain option was too weighted, you could also have a fourth option: "Remain on better terms" with an agreement for another referendum or something 5 years down the road (or maybe that is kicking the can down the road, as we've already got fantastic terms and getting something better is unlikely).

It's a difficult position because you also have sliding scales of "least worse scenarios". People who voted Brexit in 2016 who wanted an orderly Brexit that might take years to negotiate but would focus on the economy and jobs, might now vote Remain. You might also have people who voted Remain in 2016 who are annoyed that the vote is being re-run and might vote Brexit in protest (which sounds stupid, but there were people who voted Brexit in 2016 to "punish the government" and who would have voted Remain if they thought it was that serious).

We do have a fundamental problem that a very large number of people in this country do not believe that we are facing a significant shift in our way of life, that in the event of No Deal they will suddenly be paying significant amounts extra for their shopping, they'll never get another £10 RyanAir flight to Spain and a significantly reduced NHS service. It won't be "business as usual." I've lost track of the number of Leavers I've spoken to who've basically said, "You won't even notice anything different the day after it happens" and shrugged off all claims to the contrary in the face of the absolute avalanche of evidence to the contrary. It's a paradigm arrogance, that because things have been a certain way for your lifespan so far, then this is the normal and things will remain that way until time immemorial and anyone saying otherwise is hysterical or lying or exaggerating. We've seen that before major wars and financial crises as well, and you see it today with climate change (and arguably the blowback on civil rights: people are happy with saying that equal rights is great, right up until the second they think they will either be disadvantaged or even that they will lose their inherent benefit to create a level playing field, at which point they will rail against it). It's a very difficult form of inertia to overcome.

[SeanF]

On ‎8‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 10:07 AM, mormont said:

Maybe. But it would surely be preferable to the government taking us into a No Deal Brexit purely because they're so arrogant that they prefer inflicting disaster on the country (and blaming it on the EU) to admitting that the things Brexiteers promised were always impossible,

If it is not possible for the Commons to agree on any deal, or no deal, or revoking A.50 then perhaps a fresh election would be the way to break the logjam.