O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[rolymiller]

...it must be catching then this regurgitating disease because you do the same with meaningless tory soundbites...oh yus...

[WanChaiMiller]

What a smug ******* Linekar is.One of BBC's highest paid "celebrities" and he thinks he has the right to make patronising comments about one of his ex fellow professionals.Then again he is only towing the BBC party line regarding Brexit.The top wage earners will look after each other and we taxpayers are funding it all.

Are you saying individuals are no longer allowed to express an opinion if they are contrary to the will of the people. Dangerous times if this is our future under brexit.

[WanChaiMiller]

This is Rees Mogg we are talking about - the guy advocating no deal brexit.

At the same time he shifted his investment fund business to Dublin. The prospectus for the new business, which was registered in March and will be governed by EU and Irish rules, listed Brexit as one of the risks, as it could cause “considerable uncertainty". He also warns the good people of Britain that they should not expect any financial benefit from Brexit for up to 50 years.

Happy days.

[MillerBill]

Are you saying individuals are no longer allowed to express an opinion if they are contrary to the will of the people. Dangerous times if this is our future under brexit.

No,it's the BBC to blame.He's been allowed to use this platform they gave him.Money is nothing to the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation,they are very good at spending what they receive from us plus the "gifts" from the EU.No doubt the massive overspend on the EastEnders work will be overlooked.These people are never accountable.Yes,a little bit like another organisation in Belgium.

[ragingpup]

I’m not sure where you think you are going with this. You told me that you had a document that showed no difference between Labour and Tory governments and I speculated how the figures would look if you took the non-Labour governments of 1997 to 2010 out of the data. In response, you assured me that it would make no difference, which, of course, caused me to believe that you’d sat and worked through the raw data to be so confident. When I asked you for your workings out, you’ve posted a load of stuff that includes the non-Labour governments of 1997 to 2010. Did you mean to post something else?

The significance of the Blair/Brown non-Labour government data being included is that it will skew the figures quite markedly as you are talking 13 years of government compared with only 11 years of actual Labour government within the period of the data set. You will recall that when he came to power in 1997, Blair kept to his manifesto promise (those were the days!) and followed the spending plans of the outgoing Tory administration. That resulted in him running significant budget surplus for several years.

As gm hints, isn’t the issue here that – if we accept your assertion that the data shows no difference between the outurns of the two brands of government – you have to look at the inputs in tax takes. In other words, given that the Tories tend to be tax cutters, isn’t the position that you are setting out that you pay less under the Tories to get the same results?

Ok - I'll go along with that. So you seem to be accepting that the outputs of the governments pre 97 achieve the same outputs but we are paying more to achieve this? Can you go a bit further to show how specifically tax rates were adjusted so that the public as a whole were paying more or less under the various governments? From 56 through to 97?

And what about all of the other aspects of the report I've shown. If you disagree with these conclusions, please respond to each showing why they aren't correct. I'm good to learn.

[ragingpup]

I appreciate that it’s not your job to negotiate a deal (we would be in real trouble if it was), but you said that your preferred option was one that ‘aligns with’ the Single Market and Customs Union and I am interested in what you mean.

You must have thought this through to want such a deal. So where would you align and in what respects would you diverge? And how would you deal with technical issues and governance within the aligned relationship?

Whilst I’m personally interested in your ideas, I am also thinking about you when I ask, as I fear that some posters will look at your unwillingness to explain what you believe in and will says’ blimey, that raging is simply regurgitating meaningless Labour soundbites without understanding a single word of what he’s writing’. I wouldn’t like that. Our relationship is based on a mutual respect and I don’t like the idea of people thinking that, on this issue, you are reduced to the level of the nodding dog on the Churchill advert going ‘Oh yees’ whenever a member of the shadow cabinet says something.

I mean along the same lines (painful as it is to say) as those two Momentum stalwarts Michael Gove:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...inner-tory-mps

and Amber Rudd:

https://www.ft.com/content/3a0010aa-...0-57a2a826423e

As I've said, I'm a drama graduate, I'm **** at economics and politics, I don't pretend otherwise, so I can't put together the intricacies of a political negotiation with the EU along the lines that I would like. But come on: it's not that difficult to understand is it? You can even forget the word alignment if it upsets you: lets try the phrase, an agreement that brings some of the same benefits as the single market, or 'it looks a bit like' the single market. But bottom line is: 1. extend the withdrawal period 2. get a new negotiation team 3. Negotiate a new deal long the libes of what Gove/Rudd are suggesting. A deal focused on retaining aspects of the SM and CU but with concessions to gain aspects of control of FoM and more control of ECJ. After that outline, an unrealistic wish if the EU stays rigid, it would be up to the negotiators to get whatever deal they could.

So; back to you:

1. Assuming that if Gove, Rudd, Labour and probably the majority of the commons would most likely prefer this direction of negotiation (of course, this would hugely depend on what concessions that could be made from the EU but based on the actual fact that they WANT (sorry, just fun) frictionless trade with us, it's their main wish, their number 1 fantasy, their prime boner, it is much more likely to happen than May achieving a commons majority with her deal) what are your objections to it, if of course the EU gave concessions on FoM and ECJ (as a country outside EU)? If it could be achieved, would you want it to happen along these lines? If not why not? Remember, a large number of Conservative MPs favour this as a compromise: why would you disagree with them?

2. Again - for the love of God, again - what do you WANT (fun, FUN) to happen now? What is your own ideal next move that May should make? Or any other interested party for that matter. Just say what direction you would like the government (or other party) to take next, however much of a long shot it might be? (I do offer, from my many years of drama training "Have an Opinion of Your Own' workshops which I could do mates rates on. £39 billion with no guaranteed outcome. You liked that in May's deal didn't you?)

3. You seem to be indicating, in slightly subtle hints, but I am picking them up, that I am mindlessly following the position of the Labour Party (even though you have spent ages trying to convince MMM that Labour are dedicated to a 2nd referendum now and I have stated numerous times that I oppose a 2nd referendum). Could you please outline, for the boys and girls reading (not many God help us) how your arguments on Brexit have in any way differed from your prime minister?


(I apologise, I know you don't like my questions, on account that they, incessantly, **** all over you...)
Will he shoot? Watch this space...

[animallittle3]

Tonights late night rambling from animal continues more or less along the same lines .

I had a one to one with our top gaffer today , he's a great lad , down to earth and says it as it is , what's more you can give it back to him and he doesn't do the pull rank on you thing , he has my total respect .

How the fuq can I place fecking orders with our suppliers whilst this pantomime is going on ?

I just don't know what the bill will be or even when I'm going to receive the goods .

We aren't talking about next weeks deliveries but those in the spring and summer time .

The only good news if that's the right wording is that our competitors are in the same boat but none the less .

So when governments feck around playing for time some of us have live in the real world , who knows how smaller businesses are going on , luckily we are a big concern and can absorb a bit but my gaffer is hamstrung by these idiots creating all of this uncertainty .

By the looks of it unnecessarily given the EU have stated many times that the deal is unnegotiable and yet ..........


I'm incredibly disappointed with my own party to tell the truth , disillusioned you might say .

I totally get the stance but the delivery is awful , Starmer is a man I respect but this second referendum idea is not one of his better ideas , it will kill this party if they push for that .

People hate one another in the Labour Party just as they do within the other lot over Brexit but it doesn't come out as much because we are in opposition .

We can all go back in time and blame whoever we want , the truth is it doesn't matter because you have to deal with the reality .

Nobody knows how to resolve this whether in government or opposition .

The whole political system is broken , can't function effectively .

Nobody involved is giving an inch , total log jam .

Meanwhile the people affected the most are just totally bemused .

This is serious shyte , if the Queen called a halt to this debacle and dissolved Parliament then who could blame her .

Then again she's a leaver too apparently so I give up .

Good night .

[great_fire]

Even fellow Beeboids are telling Lineker to be quiet now.

He thinks he's safe because the BBC share his views.

But they have to pretend not to be biased which he doesn't seem to get, they could still throw him under the bus.

[animallittle3]

Even fellow Beeboids are telling Lineker to be quiet now.

He thinks he's safe because the BBC share his views.

But they have to pretend not to be biased which he doesn't seem to get, they could still throw him under the bus.

If Moggs political career needs Peter Shilton to endorse it then he's in some trouble .

[great_fire]

How does he "need" Peter Shilton's support exactly?

Do the Remainers "need" Lineker's support?