Jump to content

JohnfromUK

Members
  • Posts

    9,795
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JohnfromUK

  1. Sir Lindsay Hoyle has won; since he has been deputy for some years, he has kept his views to himself ....... which is as it should be. Perhaps that in itself is a good sign?
  2. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    He was making a joke - but based on the facts. He knew - just like everyone else that the economic situation had gone all pear shaped on them.
  3. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    Liam Byrne, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury left the famous note to the effect that there was no money left for his successor. The following Cameron/Clegg coalition had to borrow heavily after Labour had left - to prevent total collapse of the banking system from the legacy left by Brown (and I grant you it wasn't all Brown's fault as international factors were involved. Labour also left huge commitments to pay for Private Finance Initiatives (PFI) into which they had entered. However - the actual rate of increase in debt has fallen considerably since Brown left office (May 2010) as spending has been brought under stricter control.
  4. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    ?? Fairly obviously - if you don't play there, they don't get their pound of flesh. However - I don't think anyone realistically expects that we will do no trade at all with the EU post any Brexit of whatever type, deal or no deal. Indeed it was he. Every Labour administration has left office with no money left, higher unemployment and a poorer economy. Labour is the party of unemployment and endless borrowing.
  5. A good excuse for then not getting Brexit done. The SNP and Labour are actually quite aligned on the hard left
  6. I certainly think its possible. If Farage stands against the Tories in every seat - they won't gain many and they will lose some - but Farage won't actually win many (may not even win any - UKIP never did). Labour will probably lose a few more, but LibDems will also possibly gain more. IF Farage stands in every seat - there will be no Brexit and a left of centre coalition.
  7. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    The left doesn't need to 'understand'. The left view is that the states takes on control - of Labour, (as in manpower, not the party) Businesses, Wealth, Money supply, Transport, Utilities, you name it - they want it all 'managed' by the state - on behalf of 'the people'. Historically the state has been very bad at doing this. But if you make all of your voters happy by taking money from the evil rich - and giving it to your core voters, you will get elected time after time. Just like the famous Diane Abbott interview about police numbers and costs - she didn't understand. She didn't need to understand - her voters aren't interested in the costs. They just want results and someone else can pay for it. They don't care who it comes from - or if it is borrowed, or how to pay it back. The left doesn't need to worry about costs - they either borrow the money needed, print it, or simply 'take it' from those who have carefully saved it. As I think Margaret Thatcher said - "the problems with socialism start when you run out of other peoples money to spend".
  8. The problem is this For leave: Tory say 295, Brexit say 5, total 300 - no majority For remain: Labour say 250, LibDem say 40, SNP say 35, Green say 3, Change UK (or whatever they called are this week) - say 3 - total 331 - a majority for remainers and lefties
  9. I was pretty much the same, BUT I know want to leave - in order to see democracy carried out. I disagree. The fact that the EU has refused to discuss it simply demonstrates why we ended up with a 'leave' result. Cameron went to the EU, said he was having a referendum, but that he wanted to sort a few issues (much of it around people movement) with the EU, which he could put as 'concessions from the EU' as part of his remain campaign. The EU gave him virtually nothing. Had then shown even an ounce of common sense, they would have made some concessions mainly on immigration - which would have been quite easy (and I happen to think hae benefited them as well) for them - and Cameron would have swung the vote and it would have been remain (by a small margin). As it was - he was basically sent home with a 'we won't change, it's your problem'. The British electorate 'saw red' at this display of arrogance and complete lack of interest in the UK's concerns and combined with 'a very childish' and completely wrong "Project Fear", and getting Obama to put his cents worth in influenced the vote against what Cameron wanted.
  10. Not really; You can want to leave - and ideally that should be with a decent deal. Failing that there is the present 'deal', and failing that, no deal. They are all "leave". This so called 'deal' is a bit of a red herring anyway as it is only a 'transitional arrangement' and only there because the EU has flatly refused to negotiate a long term permanent agreement until we have this 'deal' for transition. The real bit that needs to be got right is what happens after the transition period - currently December 2020 onwards. Parliament - with all of its utterly stupid delaying antics has left precious little time for this. They will use that as an excuse to delay even more. This not knowing what we are transitioning to (WTO, some form of further 'deal', something else) should have been a major red flag because I cannot see how you can negotiate transition arrangements properly until you know what the outcome of the transition is to be. We should not have attempted to even discuss a transition until it was 100% clear where we were starting from (which we do know) and where we were ending up (about which we don't know anything because the EU has refused to even discuss it). I suspect all the EU actually wanted was out £39 bn to give them transition time to persuade others to cough up the money.
  11. I don't know (how could I ?) but if you asked a similar question to before, my guess from my circle locally here is that there would be a little more support for 'leaving'. If you 'rig' the question by splitting the vote 3 ways, you may get a different answer.
  12. Which will lead to a small leave majority - and back to square 1.
  13. It is - and it is very likely to result in another hung parliament. Result - another 5 years of chaos.
  14. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    I might have added; "A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'. Many simply ignore the rules Those who ignore the rules prosper - those who follow them suffer" This is why the French (who ignore rules that don't suit them) have done well under the EU, and the UK, who tend to follow rules have found it difficult.
  15. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    The real issue is we have so many standards, so much bureaucracy that the whole thing is completely voluntary ......... unless you happen to be be supplier based inside the EU. There is no faster way to bring an organisation into disrepute that making loads of rules and not being able (or indeed willing) to police them for all. Like our Shotgun/firearms licensing systems. Over the years made vastly more onerous to those who follow the rules (and getting more so with Doctors letters required, rules on de-activated items etc.). Still nothing effective is/can be done about the unlicensed ones - which are largely those that crimes are committed with. A good organisation has few rules and rigorously polices and applies those rules. Everyone respects the rules A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'. Many simply ignore the rules
  16. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    It is far to big a field to be specific because the EU has rules for everything from a jet plane to the hole in the end of toothbrush, but dreaming up rules principally to keep out the competition is not good long term sense. I know before I retired - the data that had to be submitted for CE marking was massively onerous and much of it entirely unnecessary. Many imports were CE marked - but had never been properly tested and never policed - result - WE the inside EU manufacturer had to meet all the expensive standards - the far east good just ignored the rules and stamped the mark on anyway - and sold as 'approved'.
  17. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    Actually Europe is protecting a low efficiency, low productivity and vastly over bureaucratic and regulated fantasy land. It is a fools paradise to shut out the rest of the world and try to pretend they don't do things much better and much more efficiently.
  18. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    The standards in Europe have been set primarily to stifle competition. There are of course good reasons, but lets not dress it up as something it isn't - It is done to create a closed market.
  19. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    The 'high' standards are actually usually no 'higher' than other countries accept - just different. Their main purpose is to ensure that open competition is stifled. It is a bit like our telephone system as it was operated by the Post Office (GPO) before privatisation; It was grossly inefficient It was 'closed' in that you could only have a line or any apparatus supplied by the GPO and 'rented' very expensively Their system was antiquated using 'party lines' etc because there was no competition to keep then up to date There was along wait for new lines and facilities It was said that they had to do it to protect the 'quality of service' When it was privatised - suddenly you could buy your own phone, get your line from other suppliers. The cost of calls, apparatus etc. fell dra=maticall - and the new 'privatised' company, BT has prospered. I've never played golf in my life so I have no experience of that, but my point is that they will ensure if you are not paying 'membership', they get their 'pound of flesh' and more in other ways. It is about protecting themselves and their 'cosy protected market'.
  20. JohnfromUK

    BREXIT

    That is true, but after leaving you will have to pay a much higher green fee and maybe a non member surcarge on other things like for example parking, and should you wish to supply it with beer, you will have to accept that they will put on a large markup per pint, and you will only be able to supply beer that meets their standards for things like labelling, ingredients. They will make things as difficult as possible - because they ate a very protectionist closed market.
  21. Different types of solder require different fluxes. As far as I know, all fluxes are corrosive to a greater or lesser degree.
  22. I have to admit I had that thought as well, but wasn't sure - so said nothing. I know that there are various techniques using different materials and temperatures. Soft solder is the most gentle.
  23. Epoxy will have a different expansion rate. Filling the whole void would also affect the balance. Repair the traditional way - they are made that way because it 'works'.
  24. That was also my understanding for national elections. I don't know about local elections (and I suspect sportsbob may be right) where it might be that you have a home in one council area and a holiday home in a completely different council area. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to elect representation in both areas since you are paying council tax to both areas?
  25. They have another cunning plan; It is being reported in the press that one of the Labour tactics being widely used by Momentum is instructing students etc. to "Vote early, Vote often, Vote Labour" Methods used include stolen/intercepted voting cards in halls/shared accommodation, postal as well as 'in person' votes and voting in two constituencies (university and home). There are no checks carried out by which this can be detected and prevented; it is an 'honesty based' system. Honesty no longer features in politics.
×
×
  • Create New...