***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 3 *****
=============================================================
Continuing discussion
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 14 Jul 16 at 10:17
|
|
Cameron has said he will step down on Wednesday after PMQs so that May can take over.
|
|
Could have a new PM before I get back from Greece. And it's Westpig's favourite which is a bonus I guess. But he chose this path...
|
|
We WILL have a new PM and it isn't Westpigs' favourite, but otherwise you're right :-)
|
Ironic that it wasn't RTJ who missed the irony there.
};---)
But I'm not teasing him any more because he's been one of the good guys on this. (As have you, Smokie.)
|
|
I got back before she was asked to form the new government. So we didn't have a new PM before I got back. Indeed Cameron hadn't resigned.
|
I said may have the new PM before I'm back from Greece.. I'm back Wednesday afternoon so before she will become PM :-)
I can report this site has worked fine on my android phone.
|
|
That's because 'android' is a Greek word.
|
|
Cameron said before the last election that he would not serve the full term, so the electorate knew full well they would have a new PM at some time and May was always one of the likely candidates. I think it's a good outcome, a soft remainer in charge is what we need, someone not afraid of leaving but realistic about what it will take.
|
Well, you Remainers have got the Prime Minister you wanted.
(Like Cameron, she is not a conservative. Lower case "c" intended.)
|
|
...no we haven't; She's simply not the one you wanted (since all the possible candidates for that seem to have taken the "Leave" campaign rather too literally)....
|
|
The line from Laurel and Hardy "Well here's another nice mess you've gotten me into" suits the situation.
|
According to the Beeb...
"She said her leadership bid had been based on the need for "strong, proven leadership", the ability to unite both party and country and a "positive vision" for Britain's future.
"A vision of a country that works not for the privileged few but that works for every one of us because we're going to give people more control over their lives and that's how, together, we will build a better Britain."
"And in a message perhaps designed to reassure Brexit-supporting colleagues, Mrs May - who campaigned to stay in the EU, said: "Brexit means Brexit and we're going to make a success of it."
What's not to like Rog?
|
Who would you have chosen Roger? Given that all the people you suck up to have all quit.
I doubt though, that you care. you scarcely have the wit, nor the imagination, to understand the real world outside your little, limited and bitter purview.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 11 Jul 16 at 19:08
|
I hope Theresa May is economically liberal as well as socially conservative.
Dare I say it a One Nation Conservative.
She has to show a commitment to helping the long suffering North.
At this moment even the Greater London area is suffering since Brexit as well..
Please Theresa May help the country in the countrys hour of need.
|
>> I doubt though, that you care. you scarcely have the wit, nor the imagination, to
>> understand the real world outside your little, limited and bitter purview.
>>
Describing yourself again?
|
I am in full support of Theresa May.
She represents a breath of fresh air.
|
>>
>> >> I doubt though, that you care. you scarcely have the wit, nor the imagination,
>> to
>> >> understand the real world outside your little, limited and bitter purview.
>> >>
>>
>> Describing yourself again?
Could you two get a room?
|
|
I can't be the only one sick of the usual sneering, know all people here making their snide, bullying comments about others who don't share their far superior (in their view) knowledge and expeience.
|
I think there really does need to be a general election but I know it won't happen. I don't like her, but then there isn't that many tories I do! A bit of me also wants the Valley's to suffer when their EU subsidies goes and they won't get that money from Westminster.
I do need to tone town my language a bit though, any more comments on me on Facebook and MI5 will be going through my front door!
|
>> I think there really does need to be a general election but I know it
>> won't happen. I don't like her, but then there isn't that many tories I do!
There's very few politicians of any persuasion that are worth much of a damn.
|
I am still fairly young and not yet old enough to have learnt that!!! Please don't ruin my innocence :D Indeed though they are mostly all as bad as each other and May was my preferred choice.
I actually don't want a general election just yet anyway, because May has to have a chance to ruin things further, and the centre ground need to time to either fix labour or start a new party.
|
>>I actually don't want a general election just yet anyway,
I can't say I particularly *want* one either, but I think its necessary. This whole referendum thing has messed stuff right up, and I see no other way of clearing the air.
Though you are right, we do need a sorted out Labour party. Or at least, more sorted than it is now. Because we need two parties at least to stand up and say what they will do with the next few years, and then see what gets voted for.
And once its voted for, the winning party needs to do what they say, not run away from its responsibility via a referendum about anything.
|
>>, and the centre ground need to time to either fix labour or start a new party.<<
You could be voting for Nige yet, Rattle.
Pat
|
I wonder what Cabinet she will pick.
I wonder if there is a career left for George Osborne.
Who will be Home Secretary.
|
>>I wonder if there is a career left for George Osborne
He's still going to be an MP - it's not inconceivable May could keep him on as Chancellor but I've no idea how they get on, and who is in May's clique of chums.
Also he has a 15% stake in his dad's wallpaper business, reckoned to be worth £20-30 million, so I expect he'll manage just fine.
|
May has no cronies by all accounts, although she clearly has supporters.
Osborne will stay I think, unless he gets too uppity, then off with his head.
|
>>>> A bit of me also wants the Valley's to suffer when their EU subsidies goes
>> and they won't get that money from Westminster.
>>
>> >>
What a pathetic comment, people voted differently from you for reasons they think are just as valid as yours and you want them "Punished" as if they were child molesters or something.
You need to man up and grow a pair.
|
|
Rats hasn't expressed himself well but people everywhere and anywhere should not be immune from the effect of the vote. If a region loses subsidies as a result of the vote outcome there should be no automatic right for it to be replaced in it's entirety by central government, no matter which way the overall region voted. Same as subsidies to industry. There isn't a bottomless pit to support everything and government will need to prioritise spending in a fair way across all the demands. There will be some pain I expect.
|
>> Rats hasn't expressed himself well
>>
I think "A bit of me wants the valleys to suffer" is perfectly clear.
|
|
Well OK, I was giving him the benefit of the doubt!! :-)
|
>>What a pathetic comment,
My thoughts exactly - he could just as easily have been referring to Cornwall. Stupid boy :)
|
>>My thoughts exactly - he could just as easily have been referring to Cornwall. Stupid boy :)
Pfft off yer moral high horse (dogs can ride horses, aye?) - no small amount of the Exit vote was fulled by the desire to stick it to the 'haves' and the powers-that-be.
Turkeys vote for Xmas?
They get stuffed.
|
>>- no small amount of the Exit vote was fulled by the desire to stick it to the 'haves' and the powers-that-be.
What a load of old twoddle - are you insinuating that the EU is set up for the haves, and the have-nots should just shut up and know their place.
|
>> I can't be the only one sick of the usual sneering, know all people here
>> making their snide, bullying comments about others who don't share their far superior (in their
>> view) knowledge and experience.
The power to bully people also confers the power not to bully people, which is far more satisfying.
And the bitterness. "Get over it" isn't a phrase I like, or normally use, but sometimes it can be good advice. Nursing that sort of a grudge means the main sufferer is the nurser.
And that is the end of Thought for the Day.
OMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
|
"I can't be the only one sick of the usual sneering, know all people here making their snide, bullying comments about others who don't share their far superior (in their view) knowledge and expeience."
You're not the only one.
And the only reason I'm chipping in here (having got fed up with all the post-Brexit/political stuff a while back) is that when I've made similar comments - about the nastiness that surfaces here from time to time - it felt as if I was a lone voice.
Now I'll go and find something worthwhile to do.
|
|
Nice to see you back Focal Point.People can be very nasty behind the computer screen. If it happened in a pub we would be thumping each other.>:)
|
We had no say. The Tory MPs did and wittled down a list of 5. Then one quit and now Tory party members don't get too vote.
But you have helped kicked off a leave EU process so surely you're happy? What's the problem?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 11 Jul 16 at 21:35
|
Certainly May has not been popular with the Old Bill with her constant meddling and reforms. Other than cuts she has achieved little. But its easy to pick a fight with someone who cant fight back.
That aside and trying to look at the bigger picture she appears to be a hard nosed Madam so I'm prepared to give her the opportunity to prove herself at the sharp end.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Tue 12 Jul 16 at 00:05
|
Bit confused at the latest developments.
It is true that leave side did pull out from all leadership positions. Of course nobody expected leave to win and thus there was no plan (which I can understand).
But what is interesting is that how leave side co-ordinated (?) the pull outs. One possible reason might be rather than jumping to leadership and then fail miserably, it might be better to have the remainers to do the leave admin work and then attack them if they fail?
If Britain doesn't leave EU in next few years, then may be there will be a new party (UKIP + half of Tory + half of labour) known as Brexit party?
The other development I have noticed that now many remainers (politicans) are also praising "leave" (e.g. Osbourne)!
EU referendum result has been a "Black Swan" event. We may see more like these.
Last edited by: movilogo on Tue 12 Jul 16 at 10:32
|
I think your third para is about right, no-one wanted the poisoned chalice. A daily investment email I get has this opinion
"Personally, I think Theresa will be there until the inevitable general election, when Boris will reappear and reclaim the popular vote
"...Cameron quit, forcing Johnson's hand. Johnson conceded it a clever move… he stepped out. Gove took the hit, knowing full well he'd never win leadership (but will have been promised a high cabinet role in the future). Meanwhile, May was happy to have a go at PM that she wouldn't have otherwise got. Prime Minister looks great on a CV, no matter how it got there.
"The battle is over for now. Everyone can return to base. But be warned: the war is far from done."
Regarding your comment that many remainers (politicans) are also praising "leave", as Leave voters seem to be absolutely convinced that that is the right path, and as we keep being reminded they are in the majority, any politician would be foolish to go against the flow at the moment - that wouldn't be good for the CV, or for immediate job prospects in Osborne's case (I expect he wants to hang on as Chancellor).
|
>>Regarding your comment that many remainers (politicans) are also praising "leave",
For many people, it was quite finely balanced. It certainly was for me, though I felt the economic certainty of remain won the day. However, remain lost, and one has to make the best of it.
In another referendum - were one to be offered (which seems unlikely) - I should likely vote to leave as it is the stated will of the people, and the idea that politicians can offer a referendum and then overrule it because they don't like the result stinks. A bit like the idea of a second Scottish referendum.
|
|
That seems a bit odd, MM. Given that we're in this mess because a significant minority voted Leave in the belief that the majority would vote Remain and so they could afford to have their little protest, you'd think a second vote would be the occasion to put all such second-guessing aside and vote for the option (which should be clear by then) that best serves the country as a whole.
|
|
Actually I'm with MM too. I voted 'in' because, on balance, the economics won over my concerns about ever more remote democracy / decision making. If we become the sort of country that keeps running referendums until the people vote for the 'right' answer, then for me the balance tips slightly the other way and I'll vote 'out'. It actually underlines my concerns about EU decision making (I know, it's not actually EU in this case...) and a weakening of democracy!
|
>> That seems a bit odd, MM. Given that we're in this mess because a significant
>> minority voted Leave in the belief that the majority would vote Remain and so they
>> could afford to have their little protest, you'd think a second vote would be the
>> occasion to put all such second-guessing aside and vote for the option (which should be
>> clear by then) that best serves the country as a whole.
>>
I know you'd like a rerun, at what point do you think it's too late to have one?
|
Me? Not sure I do want a rerun, but it's far from clear that Leave is the true will of the majority, and that might be the only way to be sure. If we had one, it might have to be a three-way question with an order of preference:
- Leave the EU but retain access to the Single Market
- Leave the EU and take full control over movement of labour into the UK
- Remain in the EU
It would be an acknowledgment that the original question was inadequate and that there were now clear decisions to be made on priorities. The two Leave options are mutually incompatible, and Vote Leave was not honest enough to explain this, so many voted Leave in the hope of getting both. More clarity in the question should concentrate people's minds on what they're really going to get for their vote.
As for when, it rather depends how the new government gets on with defining the options in its discussions with the rest of the EU. Six months might be a reasonable period.
|
i think, in the interests of balance, we need more 'remain' options. How about a 'remain in a reformed EU' as well?
The Greeks, Spanish and Italians would thank us for that - theyd love a bit more control to be able to provide a stimulus to their economies...
|
The plight of the Southern European countries just highlights why something needs to change. Their populations, particularly the young, are suffering massively, and their governments have limited options available. Now, this is mainly because of the constraints of the euro not Europe, but short of massive fiscal transfers from the stronger economies south it can't be rectified. And politically that's very unlikely to happen.
If the solution is 'more Europe' then at some point we will need to join the euro, or make the decision we (apparently...) have just made. So is it better sooner rather than later?
I voted remain, which you could argue really just kicks the can down the road...a true European approach ;)
|
We can't have a direct re-run but as circumstances change and/or the scope of the deliverables changes then how would a government deal with it, if the new deliverable isn't aligned to the perception of what the Out vote mandated?
For instance as an extreme, if the interpretation was that migration should be cut by 50% but in reality that isn't possible (maybe because some trade-off) what does the government have to do to appease the Out voters? If just go ahead and agree something different to the voter expectation without reference to the population then people will be moaning that they didn't do what they were mandated to.
I feel that there has to be an agreed definition of what the referendum was expected to deliver, then at the point where reasonable efforts have been made to reach those deliverables there should be another vote to see if we find them acceptable, if they do not match the expectation. Having said that, I don't want another vote at all really but given the divisiveness of the one just gone I don't see any other way.
And of course, that does depend on someone actually defining what it was all about in the first place, and drawing up a list of acceptable levels of achievement against those objectives. Given that the Out voters seem largely to have very differing views on what they were expecting, that in itself could be a problem...
|
A second referendum now would almost certainly make things worse.
On the "there's no plan" thing I have already responded elsewhere.
Cameron may in the end be remembered for doing the right thing, if for the wrong reasons; as might a large proportion of Leave voters.
I'm grateful to you WdB for causing me to dig a little more deeply into some of the aspects of Brexit. I feel more optimistic about it than I have ever done. The opportunities here are not to do with migration, sovereignty for it's own sake or product regulations, but trade - the dimension that everybody fears will be a disaster.
If you had a business serving two large customer segments, one of which was in long term relative decline compared to the other, where would you put your focus? Both of course, but which one is most important for your future?
If by "this mess" WdB you mean that the current situation is necessarily a disaster, I disagree, without being glib about it. It could no doubt be made into a disaster. It is a 'messy' problem, i.e. one without a simple answer, which can only be resolved step by step with a flexible approach.
Various scenarios have been put forward as a starting point but I would guess that May's team will start by testing the EFTA route, with or without EEA membership.
I don't know whether you have seen any of the plans mooted - this one dates back to 2014, and was the IEA's Brexit Prize winner. It's a bit much to expect one bloke to have written the answer two years ago, but it's an interesting read.
goo.gl/6G1Nzm
|
The economic outlook is going to be challenging.
I left a client in London after an hour with them (the meeting was supposed to last the day). They work for multinational companies and their order pipeline has disappeared overnight from £2 million a month to £150 thousand next month and month after. The have no work as the multinational companies are not spending on UK based operations at the moment.
Directors were busy drawing up layoffs and their parent has switched to supporting their businesses elsewhere in Europe.
Upwards of 100 staff will be impacted.
|
Those who voted Remain and won't accept the result, seeking a second referendum (or as many as needed to get the decision they want), should ask themselves one question:
"If the Remain camp had won by the same margin as the Leave, how would its supporters have reacted if the Leave fans had similarly sought another referendum on the grounds of the vote being close?"
Something on the lines of: "Go away", "Get Lost" or similarly polite I would suggest...:-)
|
True.
But I doubt the leaders of the Remain camp would have promptly f'd off and left the Brexiteers to take over.
|
|
True, but none of the key 'leave' figureheads were actually in the government, so couldn't have done anything anyway. The mistake was running a referendum, as a government, without a plan b even though it was not your outcome. Unless...this was plan b all along...keep Borris out ;)
|
|
But Farage himself said it would not be finished business if the remain vote won by small margin!
|
Our argument (mine anyway) is not that the vote was close. It's that the vote was
- unsafe, because people voted on false information, and significant numbers appear to have changed their mind already;
- unenforceable, because the Leave option people appear to have voted for cannot be delivered in practice;
- insufficiently clear to justify a major constitutional change, especially in light of the other two objections. (This is a stronger point than Farage's, as the presumption in such weighty constitutional matters ought to favour the status quo.)
If a clear Leave plan can be drawn up and clearly shown to be (a) in the national interest (as Parliament must require in order to approve it) and (b) supported by the majority of the electorate, then that's fine, go ahead. But I think we're a very long way from that and 'Brexit means Brexit' is an empty statement at this point.
|
Though to be fair, the false information was on both sides...and became increasing extreme, an approach which was never going to work...
One things for sure, either way politicians and lawyers will still be paid...
|
|
I don't accept that. There was some over-egging by Remain but nothing qualitatively comparable to the outright lies on immigration, lawmaking and £350m told by Leave.
|
|
I doubt whether the £350m helped the Leave case, probably the opposite - it was well understood by the 23rd June (as was Osborne's £4,300 a year). The £350m was about 45% wrong; the £4,300 was 100% speculative.
|
|
Derived but not unfounded. If the UK's GDP is £2trn and we lost 2% of that to a Leave-induced recession - as all sides conceded was likely - that would mean £40bn across 27m households, or about £1,500 apiece. Add tax rises to maintain services in the face of falling national income, and rises in the price of imported oil and manufactured goods and £4,300 doesn't seem that far fetched. Even £3,000 a household works out at ten times the net dividend from ceasing to pay contributions to the EU.
|
Ah but a drop in GDP doesn't necessarily cost the man on the street anything from an income perspective...it just means, in aggregate, we've made less or provided fewer services as a country. Which would ordinarily lead to a cut in jobs, but unemployment in the UK is c. 5% (which many economists would call full employment) and didn't deviate much from that even during the last recession.
Now incomes didn't grown much either as the economy recovered either (contrary to historic trends) - buts that more a reflection of companies ability to resist pay inflation because we're in a period of low (or in the case of food, fuel and mortgages negative) inflation. It'll be interesting to see what a period if inflation, if it materialises, does to this.
My biggest fear is that we move into a period of no growth, negative interest rates, declining/ageing population and rising government debt. That's a scenario eerily similar to that which Japan found itself in back in the 80s/90s. It's still in it... That's why I voted in, but why I'm sanguine about where we are because despite all that, Japan as a country is still going! And, with the shape Europe is in, we more than likely would end up in the same place anyway at some point... ;)
|
|
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought at various times the remainers claimed that interest rates would rise, there was a risk of a severe shock to (or even collapse of) the banking system (now appears a bigger risk to Italy!), the stock exchange would crash and our pensions would be decimated, we would need visas to leave the country, house prices would tumble and we would have any one left do any work. All exageration and hyperbole to make a point which is how I (maybe not all) took the out campaigners statements too. Now of course, this might all still happen, but it hasn't yet...!!
|
Some of those may have featured on the margins, but not as headlines on the scale of the Leave campaign leaflet and the Sweet Old White Lady NHS TV slot.
In any case, forget the causes for a moment and consider the effects. Are we seeing a mass expression of remorse from individuals who flopped on the Remain side of the fence because they thought their friends expected it? I've seen that from a couple of S******** journalists but the clear trend is in the other direction. In other words, whatever Leave told them, people now see that it can't be delivered or was never true in the first place, and the narrow majority Leave achieved on the 23rd may no longer even exist.
|
|
I'd like it to be true, but do you really think that their are *that* many leave votes that were protests, or that have changed their minds? In reality, for most of not all of them, not much has changed yet. And still might not. So why change? I can't see that the fundamental economic reasons for staying, which haven't changed, are going to convince many of the leaves to swap now. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't see much evidence of it. I see a lot of remains telling them they're wrong, but then wasn't that part of the problem in the first place... We're British... Telling us what to do never goes down well :p. Politicians never learn... ;)
|
|
... and the Leaves here seem to be ever more firmly entrenched rather than being swayed by any discussion
|
Here, yes. But it's hardly a representative sample. One in 30 would be enough, but I doubt we've got 30 to rub together (and all that fleece might start a fire if we did.)
In any case, reasonable doubt ought to be enough - don't we have to be 100% sure there is majority support before proceeding to the exit? Wasn't that the whole point of the referendum?
There's an amusing but serious police video about tea - well, about informed consent really - that has some relevance here. Even if the person appeared to want tea earlier, it says, you can't take that to mean they want tea now, so make sure they do want it and if they don't, don't make them drink it.
|
> There's an amusing but serious police video about tea - well, about informed consent really
>> - that has some relevance here. Even if the person appeared to want tea earlier,
>> it says, you can't take that to mean they want tea now, so make sure
>> they do want it and if they don't, don't make them drink it.
>>
I've seen that one we had to watch it at work as part of the latest D&I training, i didn't know the police made it though. Yes it is quite amusing, we had laughing and giggling at work through the whole thing.
|
|
I've looked again at the link I followed to get to it. It's not by the police, but the link was one 'recommended' by the Thames Valley force.
|
I'm not sure that aligning remainers with potential rapists, charged with double checking that the outs really meant out, is going to help move the debate on too far!
Let's see what May's brexit team looks like, and then what their plan is first!!
|
>> Let's see what May's brexit team looks like, and then what their plan is first!!
>>
....and then have a referendum......
;-)
|
Do you really think the plan will be published? Not if they've any sense, it won't.
I expect that they will set out their opening position with as few specifics as possible, with good reason.
|
|
Yes, sloppy choice of words on my part...
|
I've accepted the result but as per the Hislop quote which has been linked to a few times, we are still entitled to discuss the outcome and the future, also to speculate about whether or not it was a Good Thing and even whether the mechanism of the referendum was flawed.
The Remainders response you suggest is only what the Leavers are saying now isn't it?
|
I'm beginning to think I'd like to see another In/Out referendum so we can 'stick it' to the whinging bad losers once and for all.
:o}
Last edited by: Dog on Tue 12 Jul 16 at 13:32
|
|
And what would your question be, Dog? 'Cos that's plainly been a big part of the problem with the first one.
|
|
I'm orf out to enjoy the summer sunshine (while it lasts) with my two dogs, Will ... Don't work too hard ;)
|
I get that the question isn't one that gave a whole lot of options. However that's the same as general election. Noted it's not quite the same, however in principle it is.
I think it's very dangerous to start second guessing people and their intentions.
I think that in the future there could be one should things substantial change. Other countries had a second one at various treaties without total collapse economically or politically. However I rate that as very remote for the uk.
|
A question for those that voted leave.
If our EU exit results in what they call Norway plus will you be happy? This will give free access to the common market and freedom of movement for EU citizens with some token controls. We'll also post money to the EU.
About referendum would be a bad idea. But remember the question was leave or stay in the EU and nothing else. Nothing on control of immigration.
At least the right of the Tory party won't be providing the new leader.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 12 Jul 16 at 14:28
|
As a remainite, not because I like the EU, but because of the economic implications , though I acknowledge the peace and prosperity that the EU brought to Europe, just look back at the films of the UK in the 1960s, 70s and 80s (The Sweeny, Minder amongst others) and you can see that cities lacked real investment. We joined the Common Market at that time because it was clear that European economies were getting stronger and standards of living in Northern Europe were outstripping outs. Perhaps the EU expansion should have stopped there?
I would now like to see a total exit. A half in half out solution (like Norway) will please few because immigration will still be an issue as will any membership fees we will need to pay without any say in the rules!
I personally think the lies told by the leave campaign were deplorable and on a personal level, my shares are still down over 20% (mainly banking - oh well).
I also do worry about my job, I have visited over a dozen clients since the vote, many have already seen a downturn and one, mentioned earlier in this thread has seen a disastrous outcome already with orders down 90% - they sell to multinational companies - who have just turned off the tap regarding investment to the UK for the foreseeable future and this has wiped out their business. If other clients go this way then my company's turnover will suffer as well, with obvious consequences.
|
|
Something like Norway plus might be quicker to implement and therefore less damage to our economy. Nobody defined what Brexit had to include apart from not being in the EU :-;
|
|
On the grounds the fat lady has not yet sung, I'd say there is a chance of a second referendum, but only if the background to the question has significantly changed. And "didn't like the first polls result" is not a reason. We may yet see Theresa pose the point, but we'll have to wait and see.
|
>> we'll have to wait and see.
>>
we're not very good at that on here, are we?
|
Here's a recent article that lays out in more detail what I put in my bullets earlier. It's really not about 'not liking the result' - not that I do, of course - but about achieving a result that's honest and fair for all the interested parties, and which complies with our constitution, which is not as unwritten as some will tell you.
www.consoc.org.uk/2016/07/the-eu-referendum-and-some-paradoxes-of-democratic-legitimacy-by-nat-le-roux-of-the-constitution-society/
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Tue 12 Jul 16 at 14:40
|
Genuine question, how much of this legal angle re the vote was covered before the vote?
I don't remember any of it, but I didn't look for it.
|
None that I noticed. A few wondered whether a higher majority should be required, and Farage offered his 'unfinished business' pre-quibble.
Partly why we're in such a mess now.
|
>> None that I noticed.
I wonder why that was?
|
Who will be Theresa May Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Please God not George Osborne.
What about Foreign Secretery.
Who will be Chief Brexitier negotiator.
All things to be decided tomorrow.
Cannot wait.
|
Let me google that for you fluffy...I'm at the airport, I have time...
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36776410
|
I would have thought that she might want stability and leave Osborne where he is if she can get the right undertakings from him, although I doubt if he can really be controlled.
On the other hand, I'd be very happy to see Hammond moved away from the FO and the negotiations, as he seems to prefer making the EU case rather than the UK's.
|
>> Who will be Theresa May Chancellor of the Exchequer.
>>
>> Please God not George Osborne.
>>
>> What about Foreign Secretery.
>>
>> Who will be Chief Brexitier negotiator.
>>
>> All things to be decided tomorrow.
>>
>> Cannot wait.
>>
Please use question marks for questions. You have made several posts recently that have looked like statements rather than questions and it is annoying!
|
>>that have looked like statements rather than questions and it is annoying!<<
If Fluffy can carry on posting on here after all the boring flak he gets from a few of the members, then you should be looking to him for anger management advice Zippy.
You knew they were questions, what's the problem?
Pat
|
It is important, for example:
"Most of the time, travellers worry about their luggage.â€
Or
"Most of the time travellers worry about their luggage."
|
or Pedants shouldn't worry about the wording of others, but the English teachers that taught them!
At the end of the day, they still get their message across, which sometimes Pedants don't! ;-)
|
|
You can take horse to water, but you can't make them think.
|
>> or Pedants shouldn't worry about the wording of others, but the English teachers that taught
>> them!
>> At the end of the day, they still get their message across, which sometimes Pedants
>> don't! ;-)
>>
They don't always though....
Dear John:
I want a man who knows what love is all about.
You are generous, kind, thoughtful.
People who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior.
You have ruined me for other men.
I yearn for you.
I have no feelings whatsoever when we’re apart.
I can be forever happy.
Will you let me be yours?
Gloria
Now let’s see how those same words read with the punctuation in different places:
Dear John:
I want a man who knows what love is.
All about you are generous, kind, thoughtful people, who are not like you.
Admit to being useless and inferior.
You have ruined me.
For other men, I yearn.
For you, I have no feelings whatsoever.
When we’re apart, I can be forever happy.
Will you let me be?
Yours,
Gloria
There seems to be a backlash against learning at the moment, which is not a good thing.
|
I agree with you whole-heartedly, the point I was trying to get across was: If it is the only way they know, pulling people up over it all the time isn't going to correct the problem, and can cause resentment and hesitation over expressing their views in writing again. A better idea may be for the "reader" to use their better understanding of the language to mentally correct where necessary as they read. Ok that may lead to misunderstanding some messages, but that can be corrected by further discussion, without making anyone feel inferior.
Pedantry over the written word is almost akin to berating somebody for speaking with an accent which is different to your own.
|
|
;-) Thanks! - I can still remember my primary school teacher pulling me out in front of the class and telling me: "Writing is like Walking Stephen, they both begin with a "W", and like Walking if you need a rest you use a Comma, if you change direction you use a Full-stop!"
|
>> Pedantry over the written word is almost akin to berating somebody for speaking with an
>> accent which is different to your own.
>>
Agree if it is done maliciously
I think most of the grammar etc. pedantry on here is done in a fairly gentle, humorous manner
Unlike some of the other more personal insult stuff
|
Tory Leadership thread Vol 1 - Manatee
