Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Burt06
01 Sep 16 21:12
Joined:
Date Joined: 13 Dec 11
| Topic/replies: 3,792 | Blogger: Burt06's blog
Sterling nears the $1.33 mark as UK manufacturing soars to 10-month high


The month-on-month increase in the level of the headline UK manufacturing PMI was the joint-biggest rise in the near 25-year history of the survey, Markit said.

UK manufacturing production increased at its fastest pace in seven months during August, the research group added.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-3768556/Sterling-breaks-1-32-mark-UK-August-manufacturing-soars-10-month-high.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

WE ARE LEAVING THE BUILDING AND BOOMINGCool
Pause Switch to Standard View GREAT BRITAIN BOOMING AFTER BREXIT
Show More
Loading...
Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 12:17 PM BST
Hi ZenMaster - I applaud the high regard you hold your fellow countrymen in, really I do.  But I think you're wrong.  (I know you are in the specific case of the lollipop man, because he laughed and said "oh yeah" when I suggested he wait until we leave before deciding if it was good or bad). 

Using May's phrase "could be rough times ahead" should be seen in context, rather than myopically comparing her exact phrase to those you are saying were used during a campaign.  If you apply some thought to the essence of the message from both the Remain campaign (leaving = bad economically) and what May said this week (leaving will = bad economically) you can see that our current PM who is not trying to win votes is simply managing expectations.  She's saying please do not punish me (electorally) in the future when I give you what you have voted for. 

It's a good faith message that leaving will shrink the economy.  This is not hysteria, or wishing for a new referendum.  It shouldn't be "wished away" by fingers in the ears arguments about Osborne/Cameron's choice of words.  We need to pragmatically accept what we have chosen and begin the conversations about where the domestic economic changes are to be made:  higher taxes or further public sector cuts?  A smaller economy has consequences and tough choices will need to be made.
Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 12:19 PM BST
Bigpop

You are not another one who fails to understand the term 'Emergency Budget' are you?


no.  I understand this was a lie.  you have proved it (you didn't need to, but you have).

please explain why proving that Cameron/Osborne told lies is relevant to whether leaving the Eu has economic consequences.
Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 12:22 PM BST
clearly they were lying - yet their essential message (that leaving will shrink the economy) may or may not be true.  The future will tell us the answer.

That you can prove them to be liars does not also prove them wrong.  (Unfortunately).  I wish you were correct and there was no downside to leaving.
Report ZenMaster September 7, 2016 12:34 PM BST
please explain why proving that Cameron/Osborne told lies is relevant to whether leaving the Eu has economic consequences.


Pointing out that there will be no emergency budget and Osbourne was obviously attempting to hold Leave voters to ransom is relevant regarding your judgement on those who you call 'poor sods' regarding their ignorance.

You seem to believe these voters are unaware that we have not yet left the EU,  i would argue that this is not the case.

They are merely mocking the initial hysteria that erupted after the vote.

There may well be a downside to leaving but as the future evolves, i believe those down sides will be minimal.
The future has many twists and turns that we can not predict. TMay is merely protecting her reputation.
Rough time were on the way anyway, perhaps Brexit will bring it all forward.
Report ZenMaster September 7, 2016 12:42 PM BST
Judging Leave voters by the interpretations of a lollipop man must have been covered by the BBC as some stage!Laugh
Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 12:56 PM BST
Laugh

I think he's a good "everyman" 

Likeable chap.  Well meaning. The kids like him.  Getting on a bit.  clearly likes a drink.  Not very highly educated (due respect to leavers etc, but higher education and youth tend to correlate with Remain).
Report CJ70 September 7, 2016 12:56 PM BST

Sep 7, 2016 -- 6:02AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


the bind for May - as described by Peston - appears real.  That both campaigns were objectionable doesn't lessen the complexity of leaving or change our new (lesser) global position and bargaining power.  There's still no plan, because May is stuck:  Her own Party are in power but do not have a mandate (for what Brexit would mean) because what people voted for was anti the existing arrangement but not pro something specific.  And the differing possible outcomes (of Out) cover a vast range of alternatives.  She is further stuck by the huge differences of opinion in her own party between those on the right who do not care about retaining access to the Single Market if it means retaining Free movement and a membership fee, and those in the centre whose first instinct is to mitigate economic risk (by compromise).  Which is probably why there's been no election, even though logically (given her current popularity) you'd think now was a good time and given the Tory propaganda about Gordon Brown doing the same thing after Blair went in 2007, it's probably the morally right thing to do also.Interesting times ahead.  FWIW: I very much agree with the sentiment to look on the bright side - "it wont be so bad" - is a good way to roll in general.  I'm just concerned the poor sods who will be on the worse end of future economic woes are (yet again) being misled and manipulated.


I'm not sure what you see as this 'bind' for May. If its written by a millionaire remain campaigner like Peston then he is unlikely to have been objective. Blindly following something he has written isn't something that you should probably be doing.

There will be a plan, if there isn't a plan then the civil servants deliberately not doing their job should be sacked. I suspect what you mean is that the Gov. hasn't put its negotiating positions in the public domain. I think you are blinding yourself purposely to reinforce your belief.

I don't think you understand what having access to the single market means. You don't need membership of the EU to access the single market as evidenced by trade with non-EU countries.

There's been no election because it is virtually impossible to have an election because of electoral law that has been put in position since the times you reference.

Perhaps the people you believed that said there would be instant economic woes are wrong again?

There are a percentage who voted remain who fully believe in the EU project and voted in defence of all it stands for. Unfortunately the majority of people who voted remain don't seem to understand why they wanted to remain apart from these tall tales of economic armageddon.

Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 12:58 PM BST
If its written by a millionaire remain campaigner like Peston then he is unlikely to have been objective. Blindly following something he has written isn't something that you should probably be doing.

this is a problem (for you).
Report CJ70 September 7, 2016 1:08 PM BST

Sep 7, 2016 -- 6:58AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


If its written by a millionaire remain campaigner like Peston then he is unlikely to have been objective. Blindly following something he has written isn't something that you should probably be doing.this is a problem (for you).


For anyone objective I'd have thought. It's much like taking a view on the current Gov. by coverage in the Morning Star.

Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 1:11 PM BST
Perhaps the people you believed that said there would be instant economic woes are wrong again?

I'm not sure I did (believe anyone in the campaign); which is why I didn't know which way to vote and didn't decide until very late in the date.

I think one of the problems is that the economic problems which may be caused by Leaving will manifest themselves slowly.  Hence - the term Armageddon - with it's biblical connotations of an instant vengeful Old Testament God wreaking havoc is a bad description.  So when we Leave and the thousand different investment decisions which follow it happen gradually; there wont be a single moment in time when this single huge event is obvious.
In a nutshell it's gradual.  But - when we remove immigration; and we remove ourselves from the EU, and 3 or 5 or 7 years down the line the economy has shrunk (by 10% for example); it will manifestly have been a negative thing.  And people on here will be arguing it wasn't "Armageddon" because they are attached to the argument, rather than seeing the economic change.  It's more about the use of words than anything else.  Arguing about "Armageddon" is pointless.  We should be discussing economic outcomes.  But of course, that would require a different style of politics with an audience with a generally different set of values (and education/expectations).  It's much easier to argue simple points.
Report CJ70 September 7, 2016 1:17 PM BST
A lot of people did believe that there would be instant economic shock and that affected their voting. Now those lobbying for people to vote Remain have rowed back on those claims.

The same people who are lobbying for another vote and a fudge of the vote have now changed to saying pain will come later.

I don't think there will be any significant economic impact long term, in fact not being tied into a shrinking customs union can do little but benefit the UK.
Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 1:17 PM BST
your style here - is to rubbish something you disagree with on the basis that the author is wealthy. Perhaps you could post up some guidelines for whose opinion is relevant?

Keep it simple.  £50,000 per year up to £75,000?  more?  less? 

Any other factors to keep in mind?  Height?  Hair colour?  please share.
Report CJ70 September 7, 2016 1:28 PM BST

Sep 7, 2016 -- 7:17AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


your style here - is to rubbish something you disagree with on the basis that the author is wealthy. Perhaps you could post up some guidelines for whose opinion is relevant?Keep it simple.  £50,000 per year up to £75,000?  more?  less?  Any other factors to keep in mind?  Height?  Hair colour?  please share.


I think its pretty clear that I suggested that you shouldn't blindly follow the opinion of someone who has a dog in the fight if you want to be seen to be objective.

Report bigpoppapump September 7, 2016 1:37 PM BST
anyone writing anything isn't objective; assuming you have the ability to discern objectivity is a mistake.

All you can do - reasonably - is read somebody's view and their stated reasons.  some you'll agree with, so you wont, but if you shut down and assume they are wrong based on somebody's wealth you create a problem for yourself (you may miss out on learning something new).  nobody already has all the answers.
Report CJ70 September 7, 2016 1:48 PM BST

Sep 7, 2016 -- 7:37AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


anyone writing anything isn't objective; assuming you have the ability to discern objectivity is a mistake.All you can do - reasonably - is read somebody's view and their stated reasons.  some you'll agree with, so you wont, but if you shut down and assume they are wrong based on somebody's wealth you create a problem for yourself (you may miss out on learning something new).  nobody already has all the answers.


There's a world of lobbyists who want everybody to believe that.

I'm not sure I suggested anyone was wrong because of their wealth, I suggested he wasn't objective because he was a remain campaigner. My comments on wealth were based on those voting remain following millionaire celebs such as Izzard and Church.

Report ZenMaster September 7, 2016 3:24 PM BST
I'm not sure I did (believe anyone in the campaign); which is why I didn't know which way to vote and didn't decide until very late in the date.


Bigpop

So what or who persuaded you in the end on how you voted?

I made my mind up years ago.
Report ZenMaster September 7, 2016 7:02 PM BST
Agree with you on that Tony.

By the way i see that the BBC are still up to their games with Farage.
When he was interviewed about what Theresa May said about the points system, the interviewer said "So you lied" regarding the Leave voters wanting a points system.

Farage rightly pointed out " No, the Prime Minister could implement a points system...."

If Farage is such a dishonest populist then why do they constantly need to accuse him of something that he had no authority to deliver ( and please don't suggest that he made promises ) and quote him out of context.
Report sageform September 7, 2016 8:06 PM BST
Anything Faraage said would have been in the context of his party having a majority in Parliament which was never likely. He has no more influence on government policy that you or I.
Report ZenMaster September 7, 2016 8:24 PM BST
Exactly, and as he realised as well as you and i that Ukip would hold no Parliamentary majority he could not possibly make or break any promises.

He made suggestions on what 'could' happen after a Leave vote, yet the BBC still accuse him of misleading the public.
The BBC really must have a low opinion regarding the intelligence of their paying viewers to carry on with this charade.

How Farage keeps his cool, i do not know.
Report bongo September 7, 2016 9:16 PM BST
Oh dear, I think tony57 and Zen want to talk about 'our' fishing fleet and 'our' waters.
We didn't reject the scum of the central planning of Brussels to be replaced by another set of scum in a new department for fishing in Westminster who will tell us these are 'our' waters. That's just replacing one lot of filth with another set of filth who want to control peoples lives and make them grateful for it.
There is a problem though with fishing summed up in the term 'tragedy of the commons', so you can't have a free for all.

But what you can do is devolve fishing policy to local authorities that have ports and coastline, and let the 100 or so council areas who get their rights figure out their own system. If green Brighton wants one system and working class Liverpool wants a different one, then bring it on. There is no reason why the ejaculated brain content of central planners who couldn't get into another civil service branch should control a UK policy.

Even better: such a localised policy would massively annoy Nicola Sturgeon. Let the Scots work out their own policy and you can bet in a year or two they won't want to give it back to their lovers in Brussels gift wrapped in jock ****.
Report melv September 8, 2016 6:31 AM BST
This is is your “Booming Britain”.
The housing market has stabalised. Yaroooo!!!!!. You all garump. Vidication!!!!! More victories for Brexit.

But this is how the speaker from the Royal Institute of Chartered Survetors
explained the results. He said “ I think people are beginning to realise that Brexit; whatever that means; is a long way off.”

He does not know what Brexit means. And if you think you do you have been conned and you are deluded.

A long way off indeed. Up high in the sky with the pie.
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 9:07 AM BST
im sorry i carnt express my opinion as my posts are continually deleted by people afraid of what i say!
Report Burton-Brewers September 8, 2016 9:27 AM BST
your feet must hurt melv you've been stamping them now for over 2 months.
Report unitedbiscuits September 8, 2016 10:36 AM BST
Are we nearly there yet?
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 1:22 PM BST
Bigpop

So what or who persuaded you in the end on how you voted?

I made my mind up years ago.


I resented having to choose to be honest, because the Referendum was a political tactic from Cameron (whom I hate): It was fundamentally unfair to attempt to boil down an entire political and economic situation into Yes/No.  Furthermore, there is the fact that the exit process (Article 50) is so risky for the Nation attempting to leave means it is anathema to anyone with a basic grasp of risk analysis.

Hence my contempt for people who are so sure they are right (either way). 

But I had to vote and I guess there were 3 main reasons:

1. Couldn't vote the same way as the racists.  Gut feel was to oppose those ignorant MFs.

2. I disagree with the analysis that Free movement has caused wage stagnation for ordinary people and I see free movement as a personal opportunity (I've lived and worked in Europe and also attended University in Germany).  I would want my off-spring to have the same free access to the Continent that I've enjoyed, and in a patriotic sense I would want the people of the UK to be well educated and well rounded. 

3.  I felt the onus was on the Leave campaign to make a constructive case for change.  I didn't see them attempt to do that so my default was Remain.  There's no huge passion for the EU on my part; but from my point of view there were two **** campaigns but I was holding the two campaigns to different standards.  A nuanced point, but the presentation of the whole process as a symmetrical thing was entirely wrong in my view (see above, that I didn't think there should be a referendum at all, and then when there was, it was framed and debated in an incredibly low quality fashion).

Following from point 3, I think our current political crisis (and there is one, but nobody has the appetite to think about it) follows from the campaign.  Vote Leave made no constructive case (most of their leading players were pushing their personal ambition to "win" without having a plan for victory) for their vision.  So it's okay to get a lot of the old grannies to vote for the funny Mr Johnson telling lies about bananas, but what are your actual policies on immigration? what will be our trading relations with the world - we sort of rely on the Financial Services sector however much this may not be popular? What will happen to our EU funded research facilities which fuel our world position in Pharma, and Biotech and IT?
The areas that were talked about by Leave were clever: "Take Back Control" nice slogan.  But it's a slogan, not a policy.  And what was specific was obvious nonsense about £350m/week for the NHS which was clearly aimed at the Grannies.
Did Leave make a case about Free Movement versus Single Market Access (and which was most important if it turns out we have to have both or neither)?  The fact is there is no mandate for the government to drive through the Exit (at any price) because Exit at any price wasn't debated or voted on.  This is a problem.

Now I realise that the Leave campaign didn't have the positions of power to make actual policy commitments: Fair enough.  But as the previous Government has gone; I do think there absolutely ought to be a General Election in which those campaigning for power must make detailed policy descriptions (in light of how they would manage Exit) for us to vote on.  But hey, I'm a Democrat:  Who's to say the people voting for their leaders is the right way to run things Happy
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 1:42 PM BST
bigbob
firstly i resent your accusation about being racists?you couldnt vote with them, so by your account were all racists? typical of the remain attuide!
your wrong immigration has cut the working class wages down ..ive lived it i see it and my friends also, my whole area is engulfed with it,..if its not the case, why did every area that has been swamped with migrants vote out by wide margins?
ive asked another remainer this question none of you will answer..
70m will be here by 2021 were will they live as we dont build homes for our own now? just in the practical argument forget brexit..were do they live?
you are not a sovereign nation if you do not control your borders?
i read and saw many econamists say being outside the single market would be good for the uk..
the last one we the british people should make the laws in this country..
..i dont like bullys and the remain camps argument was..you cannot leave this organization because the penalties are to severe!..
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 1:42 PM BST
everyone will have their reasons, but its interesting to look at the mindset of some who voted remain.

anti racism, this is why i voted remain? i don`t happen to believe people who come out with such nonsense, anti racism is becoming the last refuge of the scoundrel. check the tone of bigpops post.

i don`t believe that an unlimited supply of cheap labour pushes down wages. ok i do believe that to be the case. we can agreee to disagree there.

the onus on the leaave campaign to make a constructive case for change?
disagree that this was not done, but in any event people voted not so much on things they could not be certain of, but on the realities of the past and the present. they did not like what has been happening in Europe and in Britain and voted accordingly.
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 1:44 PM BST
I don't say all Leavers are racists.

I do say the racists voted to leave.

Understand?
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 1:46 PM BST
i go by your words you imply we are racists..understand?
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 1:48 PM BST
you misunderstand.

The racists voted to leave.
Many others voting to leave are not racist (I'm sure).

If there were a Venn diagram I could draw you a picture.  The Racists are a subset of the larger Exit vote.

someone else help him out here?
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 1:50 PM BST
i understand,i just think you put it wrong?
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 1:51 PM BST
1. Couldn't vote the same way as the racists.  Gut feel was to oppose those ignorant MFs.

nope.  Said it right.
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 1:54 PM BST
I'm getting the sense you're not a racist Tony?  But you have voted along with the racists without it being an obstacle to you voting that way.  For me it was a problem.  This shouldn't cause you any concern - there's no implication on your morals.  It's an honest answer to a question someone else asked further up about my motivations.
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 1:54 PM BST
the last thing i as anyone on here will testify is a racist, but i can see were freemovement is hurting my own people, i didnt know by how much till the vote, all the main areas that migrants have lived in voted out? now surely not all of them were racists?
but many were builders etc..who have seen there wages cut..by migrants willing to do the job a lot cheaper? i dont understand how you cannot see it buy the results..?
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 1:56 PM BST
yes that may or may not be true. the question that should be considered is what is the best answer for Britain and yourself as an individual when you vote.
If you decide either way and then it is possible that you find yourself in agreement with racists on this issue?
then you say well that`s good, i never thought racists could be so sensible.
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 1:56 PM BST
fair enough ? im just surprised ,you are articulate intelligent, how can you not see the evidence that freemovement has not had a impact on the working class wages?
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 1:57 PM BST
there is certainly no sense in voting the wrong way just so as you can say i don`t like racists, that would not be sensible.
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 1:58 PM BST
is it possible that racists are correct on this issue? yes i think even the most closed minded person would consider that is a possibility
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 2:00 PM BST
no lfc, your wrong? racists can never be brought down to that level..its plain wrong!i look at it from the working mans viewpoint and a left wing issue the left wing case for brexit has not been made enough?..the eu is right wing to the core..just because i was on the same side as ids does not mean i think he is sensible?Laugh
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 2:03 PM BST
Tony: A reasonable question - I'm sure you're sincere.

A complex answer: I know I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't know

I know something about the weakness of economic forecasting - there are literally millions of variables at play in a modern economy and it's usually impossible (based on past performance) to successfully link two factors and correctly predict future outcomes.  Cause and Effect are not well understood in all sorts of areas in the economy, and therefore the simple precept that immigration deflates wages is unproven.  I realise it seems obvious to you, but there you go.  I don't know and neither do you.  You just think you know.
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 2:04 PM BST
well tony i don`t understand your logic. you think that to leave is correct, and according to bigpop racists also thought to leave was correct.

i think it is only fair that you give racists credit for voting the right way..as you see it of course.
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 2:06 PM BST
wev will have to disagree on the complexities of supply and demand of labour.
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 2:07 PM BST
no problem disagreeing with you itfc Laugh
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 2:08 PM BST
imo there has never in history been a successful and prosperous economy and country that didn`t have a shortage of labour.
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 2:09 PM BST
there must always be a shortage of labour, it is one of the definig characteristics of every successful country.
Report tony57 September 8, 2016 2:25 PM BST
lfc, my point is racists will vote for the wrong reasons? we voted leave because we think its best for our country..racists vote for leave because they dont like immigrants?..i think there are too many people in my country..but i come at from a left wing view..i think taking these people away from there own country does that country no good?..educated people washing cars? i belive in training our own, and were we need people we take what we need on a points based system..not a free for all..
Report lfc1971 September 8, 2016 2:40 PM BST
i don`t agree with some of that tony, i think giving employment to hundreds of thousands of Polish people has been tremendously good for Poland and of course the individuals.

agree entirely that we should be training our own young people.

racists voting for the wrong reasons? no idea on that.
Report ZenMaster September 8, 2016 4:57 PM BST
I do say the racists voted to leave.


Bigpop


Poland is almost the complete white supremacist state within the EU. Other states alike.
Perhaps many of the Eastern Europeans over in the UK did not qualify to vote in the referendum but they fully endorsed the Remain campaign.
Report Shab September 8, 2016 8:34 PM BST

Sep 8, 2016 -- 7:44AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


I don't say all Leavers are racists.I do say the racists voted to leave.Understand?


No doubt some racists voted to Leave, and no doubt some racists voted to Remain.

Your argument is easily beaten.

Report unitedbiscuits September 8, 2016 8:38 PM BST
No doubt Shab COULD be Cameron Diaz.
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 11:21 PM BST
The Government today announced a plan to reintroduce Grammar schools.

This wasn't in the manifesto - 2015 (not long ago) - and the government making the proposal was not created by an election. This is happening because we have a different government because of the referendum.

The people who voted to leave will (hopefully) be old enough to have children older than 11.  Or, if they have children younger than 11, lets hope the children are bright enough to make it into the schools worth going to. Or, perhaps they won't notice this is happening. Or maybe they will notice but won't care...

I voted in the referendum. Grammar schools were not mentioned. It would have been nice to have been asked - I pay my taxes and was led to believe this was a democracy.
Report Burt06 September 8, 2016 11:24 PM BST
bigpoopyhead 08 Sep 16 13:48 


The racists voted to leave.


do u mean like the extreme left wing racists that support hamas?
Report bigpoppapump September 8, 2016 11:26 PM BST
No
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 12:46 AM BST
Laughtut tut, pensioner bashing. anyother common theme from the remain camp and the anti racist militants....those little old ladies are a danger to western civilisation!
Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 9:18 AM BST

Sep 8, 2016 -- 5:21PM, bigpoppapump wrote:


The Government today announced a plan to reintroduce Grammar schools. This wasn't in the manifesto - 2015 (not long ago) - and the government making the proposal was not created by an election. This is happening because we have a different government because of the referendum. The people who voted to leave will (hopefully) be old enough to have children older than 11.  Or, if they have children younger than 11, lets hope the children are bright enough to make it into the schools worth going to. Or, perhaps they won't notice this is happening. Or maybe they will notice but won't care...I voted in the referendum. Grammar schools were not mentioned. It would have been nice to have been asked - I pay my taxes and was led to believe this was a democracy.


Grammar schools don't need to be reintroduced as they have always been there. In the Con manifesto there was a commitment to expand academies, free schools and grammar schools.

I'm unsure of why you think the referendum was an election. It was one question which your side lost, you can't base your whole view around that being year dot, however unhappy you are at the result.

Report errytay September 9, 2016 10:29 AM BST
The Conservative manifesto 2015 actually said that they would "continue to allow all good schools to expand, whether they are maintained schools, free schools or grammar schools".

It did not say they would "expand grammar schools" there's a big difference between the two, just like truth and lie.
Report bigpoppapump September 9, 2016 11:28 AM BST
I'm unsure of why you think the referendum was an election. It was one question which your side lost, you can't base your whole view around that being year dot, however unhappy you are at the result.

I don't think it was an election but it did result in a new (unelected) government.  Are you going to pretend Cameron would have quit if he'd won Laugh idiot. 

for that government to embark on a new program - including education reform - with no mandate - is just one example of the law of unintended consequences.  It wont be me that lost feller; The working people who voted Leave are at the sharp end of an uneven Education system.  This was not what they voted for...
Report bigpoppapump September 9, 2016 11:29 AM BST
obviously, it wont affect the racist grannies  Cool
Report Burton-Brewers September 9, 2016 11:38 AM BST
grammar schools was yet another UKIP pledge which was nicked again by another party
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 12:26 PM BST
Poor bigpop he's not very good at logical thought.

The government has not changed, the pm has changed. In Britain we elect a political party. They run the country on a day to day basis, but for only 5 years, we don't trust them that much but 5 years seems a reasonable compromise.

Now I suppose I will have to explain to bigpop if we allow the gov to run the country why was there a referendum.
The answer is that when it is a question of the sovereign nature of Britain, and who should have authority over Britain then that is something the British people themselves must decide.

Now where are we now? well the vote has been taken and we have decided to leave. We now pass this responsibility over to government to get the best possible outcome.
And what happens if the government makes a poor job of leaving, and trade deals, and immigration etc? Well then at the next general election the British people can vote them out and a new government can look to improve all these things if possible. nothing is set in stone .

Now that's how British democracy works. Other countries look on and are amazed at the power of the British people to govern themselves.
Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 1:07 PM BST

Sep 9, 2016 -- 4:29AM, errytay wrote:


The Conservative manifesto 2015 actually said that they would "continue to allow all good schools to expand, whether they are maintained schools, free schools or grammar schools".It did not say they would "expand grammar schools" there's a big difference between the two, just like truth and lie.


Oops.

Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 1:15 PM BST

Sep 9, 2016 -- 5:28AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


I'm unsure of why you think the referendum was an election. It was one question which your side lost, you can't base your whole view around that being year dot, however unhappy you are at the result. I don't think it was an election but it did result in a new (unelected) government.  Are you going to pretend Cameron would have quit if he'd won  idiot.  for that government to embark on a new program - including education reform - with no mandate - is just one example of the law of unintended consequences.  It wont be me that lost feller; The working people who voted Leave are at the sharp end of an uneven Education system.  This was not what they voted for...


You seem to be starting from a position of ignorance on this.

The Government has had a mandate for 5 years since May 2015. What I think you mean is you don't think Theresa May was elected. This is a problem as we don't have a presidential system and people weren't voting for Cameron they were voting for individual MPs. The Government still controls a majority and therefore works on the mandate it got at the election irrespective of who is the leader.

As for David Cameron not resigning. It's been well know that he wouldn't see out a full term from before the election in 2015. Please don't start throwing insults because you have a lack of knowledge on the subject, there's enough people like that here already.

The Government won a mandate for 5 years and the British people voted to leave the EU. You may not like that, but that doesn't change the facts.

Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 1:16 PM BST
Should have read down first before replying, lfc1971 explains things far better than I.
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 1:42 PM BST
thanks cj, biscuits called me a moron yesterday so that`s niceGrin
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 1:53 PM BST
bigpop will say we should have a new election because of the racist grannies?
i find it impossible to understand why?
maybe he remembers them voting for Thatcher and hasn`t forgiven them.
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 2:22 PM BST
jewish people having to leave Europe in great numbers. just last week Beitar Jerusalem football team playing St Ettienne in France received hostility and danger from the local fans.
stones and bottles rained down o a synagogue walls in Paris as worshippers huddled inside
protesters attacked a synagogue north of Paris shouting death to the jews
they are having to leave Europe because of what Europe is becoming, this is the danger of racism in modern Europe.
Report ZenMaster September 9, 2016 2:46 PM BST
Brexit is likely to bring many happenings forward.

David Cameron was never going to complete his term as PM.
So would TMay have got the job regardless? well, there can be no conclusive answer but if there had been no referendum and Boris Johnson had become PM. he too was a supporter for the revival of grammar schools.

Although not worded in the manifesto, those who voted in the Tories, should have been prepared for this situation.
It's not as though Bigpop and Co did not have forewarning of Cameron's stance on the referendum or not staying the full term as PM.
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 3:12 PM BST
two teenagers jailed in France today for their part in an attack by a group that saw 3 men attacked in front of their children after objecting
to comments directed towards their wives
in Toulon two women were abused and insulted for wearing shorts by around 12 youths shouting **** etc
when husbands asked them to respect their wives they were attacked

this is racism in modern Europe
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 3:15 PM BST
France did not let them in and French people did not let them in, there are no borders and no border controls, this is modern Europe.
Report errytay September 9, 2016 3:35 PM BST
Oops

Must be difficult for you, English not being your first language. All good schools not the same as all schools. HTH
Report bigpoppapump September 9, 2016 4:15 PM BST

The Government has had a mandate for 5 years since May 2015. What I think you mean is you don't think Theresa May was elected. This is a problem as we don't have a presidential system and people weren't voting for Cameron they were voting for individual MPs. The Government still controls a majority and therefore works on the mandate it got at the election irrespective of who is the leader.


when Cameron resigned May became leader of the Conservative Party.  She was invited by HM the Baked Bean "to form a government" which she did.  There are new faces in all key roles (Chancellor, PM, Foreign office, Home office).  This is a new government.  If you think a government is elected at a General Election which then has a 5 year mandate then I'm afraid you're wrong.  MPs are elected at a GE, and if there's a majority from one party (as there was in 2015) then their leader forms a government. 

New leader = new government formed.  No continuity.   

you are correct there is a Continuity of Party majority, and therefore it's perfectly reasonable to argue they have a legitimate mandate. As Gordon Brown did. the Tories have now changed their tune as to whether this matters or not.

However, this argument that you only vote for your local MP ignores the reality of modern elections: There is no ambiguity that although your vote only counts in your local constituency General Election campaigns are Nationally run affairs by the parties and leaders asking for your vote "to make them Prime Minister". TV adverts are National.  The debates are entirely Presidential in style and substance. So you can score a debating point, by ignoring how the world works if you wish (on whether the PM has to call a GE), but you are plain wrong if you don't think we have a new government since Theresa May became PM.

I hope this helps.
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 4:36 PM BST
Gordon Brown
John Major
James Callaghan
Alec Douglas-Home
Harold MacMillan
Winston Churchill

these are just those since the start of WW2. there are more before that.
Report bigpoppapump September 9, 2016 4:43 PM BST
I'm astonished (genuinely) that the argument has gone the way it has!!  Laugh

my point or opinion that there's no government mandate for un-campaigned educational reform is just my opinion.  I would expect people to argue that I'm wrong (on the narrow point that they don't believe that modern elections are Nationally run affairs).  Or you could argue that a political party cannot put everything in its manifesto and hence there may be changes as time goes by (this would be a tough sell, obviously the election was only 16 months ago, but you could make the claim, I suppose).

But I'm amazed there's several posters trying to claim we don't actually have a new Government since the referendum.  It's an amazing - and I suppose a beautiful -  thing there's such a massive divergence in how people experience the world.  It would be boring if we were all the same.
Have a nice weekend chaps!
Grin
Report lfc1971 September 9, 2016 4:59 PM BST
we vote every 5 years on a partys record in government. we give them the freedom to make decisions, including changing the leader and cabinet ministers. they also have the freedom to change policy and bring in new policy as time and world events change.
we give them 5 years and then they are put to the British people again.
it is quite subtle, but it has to be to allow for a quickly changing world.
Report bigpoppapump September 9, 2016 5:04 PM BST
thanks lfc - think you've got a decent grasp of that.  I'm thinking Political Theory for your PhD rather than Economics?  Tell me - do you think we have a new Government (since May became PM)?
Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 6:16 PM BST

Sep 9, 2016 -- 9:35AM, errytay wrote:


OopsMust be difficult for you, English not being your first language. All good schools not the same as all schools. HTH


Let me know when that shovel collapses.

Report CJ70 September 9, 2016 6:43 PM BST

Sep 9, 2016 -- 10:15AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


The Government has had a mandate for 5 years since May 2015. What I think you mean is you don't think Theresa May was elected. This is a problem as we don't have a presidential system and people weren't voting for Cameron they were voting for individual MPs. The Government still controls a majority and therefore works on the mandate it got at the election irrespective of who is the leader.when Cameron resigned May became leader of the Conservative Party.  She was invited by HM the Baked Bean "to form a government" which she did.  There are new faces in all key roles (Chancellor, PM, Foreign office, Home office).  This is a new government.  If you think a government is elected at a General Election which then has a 5 year mandate then I'm afraid you're wrong.  MPs are elected at a GE, and if there's a majority from one party (as there was in 2015) then their leader forms a government.  New leader = new government formed.  No continuity.    you are correct there is a Continuity of Party majority, and therefore it's perfectly reasonable to argue they have a legitimate mandate. As Gordon Brown did. the Tories have now changed their tune as to whether this matters or not.However, this argument that you only vote for your local MP ignores the reality of modern elections: There is no ambiguity that although your vote only counts in your local constituency General Election campaigns are Nationally run affairs by the parties and leaders asking for your vote "to make them Prime Minister". TV adverts are National.  The debates are entirely Presidential in style and substance. So you can score a debating point, by ignoring how the world works if you wish (on whether the PM has to call a GE), but you are plain wrong if you don't think we have a new government since Theresa May became PM.I hope this helps.


when Cameron resigned May became leader of the Conservative Party.

Wrong there was an election, where May came out on top.

She was invited by HM the Baked Bean "to form a government" which she did.  There are new faces in all key roles (Chancellor, PM, Foreign office, Home office).  This is a new government.

Wrong. If this was the case there'd be a new Gov. after every reshuffle. For instance the Brown Gov. of 2007 still had the same mandate of the Blair Gov. of 2005 even though the opposition tried to undermine it.

If you think a government is elected at a General Election which then has a 5 year mandate then I'm afraid you're wrong.  MPs are elected at a GE, and if there's a majority from one party (as there was in 2015) then their leader forms a government.

I do think it because it is the case. When a Gov. is formed it has a mandate until it can no longer perform as a Gov. i.e a loss of confidence or a declaration of a new election. The 2010 act on 5 year parliaments enforces his as the case.


New leader = new government formed.  No continuity.

I'm afraid you just have this wrong. It may be convenient to think you need a new election but history is not on your side and it's virtually impossible to call one.

you are correct there is a Continuity of Party majority, and therefore it's perfectly reasonable to argue they have a legitimate mandate. As Gordon Brown did. the Tories have now changed their tune as to whether this matters or not.

Of course the opposition will always try to destabilise the Gov. The only difference now is that a) Labour doesn't want another election and b) It's virtually impossible to call one by the PM.


However, this argument that you only vote for your local MP ignores the reality of modern elections: There is no ambiguity that although your vote only counts in your local constituency General Election campaigns are Nationally run affairs by the parties and leaders asking for your vote "to make them Prime Minister". TV adverts are National.


Depends campaigning can be done on a candidate, regional or national level. For example local Labour campaigns didn't use Ed Miliband as he was a vote loser. Did Farage and Clegg campaign to to be PM? Your argument falls down when you look at how elections are run.

The debates are entirely Presidential in style and substance. So you can score a debating point, by ignoring how the world works if you wish (on whether the PM has to call a GE), but you are plain wrong if you don't think we have a new government since Theresa May became PM.


The debates even had regional parties that could not form a Gov. if they won every seat. By all means delude yourself if you want to, but it won't change matters and won't make you any less incorrect.


You have started from a position that is incorrect and have tried to defend it by making leaps in logic. I'm afraid it just simply doesn't work.

Report bigpoppapump September 13, 2016 4:18 PM BST
you started wrong and it got wronger.

May didn't even win an election to become Tory leader.  She was selected as a candidate by MPs and her final opponent dropped out before the Party got to vote.

I'm not repeating myself with a line by line on your post, but your basic grasp is weak.
Report Burt06 September 13, 2016 4:48 PM BST
wronger LOL
Report CJ70 September 13, 2016 5:04 PM BST

Sep 13, 2016 -- 10:18AM, bigpoppapump wrote:


you started wrong and it got wronger.May didn't even win an election to become Tory leader.  She was selected as a candidate by MPs and her final opponent dropped out before the Party got to vote.I'm not repeating myself with a line by line on your post, but your basic grasp is weak.


Bless. The old "You're wrong because you contradicted me, I don't know why, but you must be" line.

I hate to do this to you, but if you are going to say "blah your wrong" to everything that doesn't fit your narrative without trying to explain yourself. Then there's not much debate going to come in the long run is there?

You start with..

May didn't even win an election to become Tory leader.

I must have missed the coup..

You then contradicted yourself by writing this..

She was selected as a candidate by MPs and her final opponent dropped out before the Party got to vote.


Selected? You mean she nominated herself and won an election of her peers? You know that really though don't you and that was a desperate line to try and keep your flawed narrative running.

I suspect what you mean is because it didn't go to the members you don't see it as an election(Have to keep that flawed narrative running somehow don't you?). Which is fair enough, most people won't agree with you and history is not on your side. Members voting for party leaders is a relatively new phenomenon, basing your argument on that tiny straw isn't going to rescue your earlier posts which were factually all over the place at best.

Report CJ70 September 13, 2016 5:22 PM BST

Sep 13, 2016 -- 11:16AM, tony57 wrote:


bigpop,      ignore him, he,d argue with our lord!


Surely you should be encouraging him to follow your routine. No?

When you say something that's clearly bonkers and I write why you are incorrect and give you the reasons, you don't ignore you send me PM's threatening violence for having the temerity to tell you that you are wrong.

Report sean rua September 14, 2016 2:07 PM BST
We ain't got to the brexit stage yet, but for us OAPs, things are tough in GB and NI.
Report ZenMaster September 14, 2016 3:18 PM BST
No more tougher than before the referendum sean.

OAP's had blood in their poo before the referendum

Looser poo! i hear you cry.
No more and no less looser than before the referendum.
Report Injera September 14, 2016 4:41 PM BST
Sir James Dyson :

Sir James argued that it would be “suicidal” for the EU to impose tariffs on British goods as it imports £100bn more in value than it exports.

“The last thing they are going to do is impose an import duty – it is suicidal for them,” he said.

“We can make our own laws and determine our own future and determine our own trade deals with other countries throughout the world. I think it is liberation and a wonderful opportunity for all of us,” he added. - Today's Independent.
Report BIG CAT LEON LETT September 14, 2016 7:41 PM BST
I can't get any toilet tissue.
Report sean rua September 14, 2016 7:44 PM BST
zenophobe, pal,

utilities up, council tax up, no drop in immigration, all a coincidence, bc it ain't happened yet.

Pension static.

Not to worry.

Blood in everything, mate. Happy

'Tis a  grand life, if ye don't weaken.Happy
Report BIG CAT LEON LETT September 14, 2016 7:45 PM BST
There was a scrum and I got injured.People weere behaving in an antisocial manner.Police not interested though,they were unable to classify it as a hate crime due to my etnicity and background.
Report sean rua September 14, 2016 7:46 PM BST
brexit, that is ( ain't happened yet).

Developer still only offering me £400K, but I notice a lot more work going on about the place.
Report sean rua September 14, 2016 7:47 PM BST
Where was that, Cat, at Orgreave?
Confused
Were ye a cosser?
Report ZenMaster September 15, 2016 10:15 AM BST
One of the reasons he took his business to Malaysia tony was because of EU employment regulations.
He now has a workforce that has more engineering intelligence .
Report ZenMaster September 15, 2016 10:58 AM BST
Why do you put a question mark after you make a statement tony ?Grin

Dyson wanted to best knowledge as well as well tony. As you know he is forever wanting to adapt and improve his products.
Advertising for engineering brains gave priority to an EU workforce.
Making it difficult to employ brains from other parts of the world can hold back a company such as Dyson.
Report ZenMaster September 15, 2016 11:02 AM BST
Plus he wanted to break into the American market.

One can cannot be so one dimension when assessing his position tony??
Report InsiderTrader September 15, 2016 11:08 AM BST
tony,
Are you are Globalist or a Nationalist? Would you support a policy of make local, sell local, use local workforce etc or do you support one big global market?
Report Mister E September 15, 2016 11:40 AM BST
We havent Brexited yet, will be years yet, if it ever happens at all.
Report tony57 September 15, 2016 11:55 AM BST
im not either!i dont think you have to choose that way, yes i would prefare to use local sell local, and in most cases i would be for that, but you cannot just ignore the world atm,..we live in a globalist world its how we use it and do it for the benifit of our country and people
Report ZenMaster September 15, 2016 12:10 PM BST
tony

Your last post contradicts what you have previously aimed at Sir James Dyson.

I imagine you no longer look at the point of production for your purchases.
Sir James Dyson could no longer let the EU hold him back and ignore the non EU world.
Report BIG CAT LEON LETT September 16, 2016 4:47 PM BST
cosser?
Report sean rua September 16, 2016 7:09 PM BST
police officer, Cat.
Report Burt06 October 4, 2016 1:39 PM BST
U.K. Moving Forward With China Ties Post Brexit

U.K. officials have held preliminary talks with China about establishing a trade agreement following the Brexit vote, Jo Hawley, director of trade and investment at the British Consulate-General in Hong Kong, said Thursday.

"We hope that coming out of the EU gives us an opportunity to look at free-trade agreements with other countries," Hawley said at a Hong Kong University of Science and Technology seminar. "We’re very keen to push that forward with the Chinese in particular. China is the big prize."

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/u-k-moving-forward-china-102453325.html

A trade deal with China will be a goldmine for us all. Prices of many products will drop through the floor overnight leaving more cash in our pockets. Investment will sky rocket. And that's just China. We are also already speaking to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, some African countries and many more. Given most of them have a common law system based on ours the deal will be easy to set up. They will start the day after official Brexit and we will boom.

LOOKING FORWARD - BOOMING - AND LEAVING THE BUILDINGCool
Report Burt06 February 2, 2017 8:44 PM GMT
and today the BOE announce an increase in growth for this and next year.


does anyone remember the immediate brexit recession and punishment budget threats from the bullingdon club?Laugh

the remainiacs are seething about all this good news.
seething that we will soon have trade deals with the USA, China and many more.
seething that their project fear not only failed but is now viewed as the biggest pile of sh1t ever put before the british people.
seething that they lost.
seething coz they hate democracy in action.


seethe suckers, seethe.

we are booming

AND LEAVING THE BUILDINGCool
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com