Discussion
Tuna said:
No, I didn't ask what would be best for Britain, which option was better, or what analysis you've read recently. We know the answers you have for those questions, because you tell us regularly and your position has not changed in the last two years.
I asked - if the government decides to reject your approach and breaks from the CM/SU, will you accept their consensus?
Sorry, but given the amount of fI asked - if the government decides to reject your approach and breaks from the CM/SU, will you accept their consensus?
k ups this Government have made it's a bit of a silly question, no?If we were the nation we like to think we are, with intelligent leadership and a bit of vision and the bulk of people behind the idea, brexit may have been a good thing. We aren't though. Instead of leaving for a better future we are leaving because we didn't like being told what to do, now we're just being told what to do by a bunch that are really no better. I'm fairly ambivalent, it's a good opportunity but we won't seize it, we'll just trundle on pretty much as normal, arguing the toss while the world moves on. May? Corbyn? That's it - the best brains in the country? It's quite pathetic but typically British. Ah well, we will be ok, I remember the winter of discontent and worse, yet here we are, but people on both sides should be a bit more realistic.
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
I thought we got the ones the local parties and political party HQ decide we want.We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Agreed and how we expect to tempt good people when the pay is so poor beats me... We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
powerstroke said:
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Agreed and how we expect to tempt good people when the pay is so poor beats me... We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Heavens... some are even successful before they enter the political world.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Why wouldn't it be.
What you fail to understand is that brexit is not about the economy. Surveys post vote showed that the effects on the economy were a long way down the priority list for most leave voters.
How many economic recessions have you endured through your life? You are still here, still have a home, a pension?
We will survive brexit.
I've never said we won't survive. What you fail to understand is that brexit is not about the economy. Surveys post vote showed that the effects on the economy were a long way down the priority list for most leave voters.
How many economic recessions have you endured through your life? You are still here, still have a home, a pension?
We will survive brexit.
I've always taken jobs that pay more than the last one. Its usually a factor in the next step.
I'm not adverse to taking an income cut in some circumstances, but there has to be a good reason.
If we back to "sovereignty" and "immigration" as the prize worth paying, then that is an argument. It is still one that deserves further scrutiny once the scale of the economic damage becomes clearer.
When someone suggests we'll have "more success" if we leave the SM/CU - that can be debated. With the official government analysis.
"more success" it seems has more to do with keeping tory party unity hanging by a thread rather than what is best for the country.
Tuna said:
Gloria Slap said:
You asked about "more success". That sounded like an economic parameter.
No, I didn't ask what would be best for Britain, which option was better, or what analysis you've read recently. We know the answers you have for those questions, because you tell us regularly and your position has not changed in the last two years.I asked - if the government decides to reject your approach and breaks from the CM/SU, will you accept their consensus?
Henners said:
powerstroke said:
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Agreed and how we expect to tempt good people when the pay is so poor beats me... We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Heavens... some are even successful before they enter the political world.
sorry but we get what we pay for ...
powerstroke said:
Henners said:
powerstroke said:
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Agreed and how we expect to tempt good people when the pay is so poor beats me... We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
Heavens... some are even successful before they enter the political world.
sorry but we get what we pay for ...
(relative is a MP, he's not too bad either).
Gloria Slap said:
I've never said we won't survive.
I've always taken jobs that pay more than the last one. Its usually a factor in the next step.
I'm not adverse to taking an income cut in some circumstances, but there has to be a good reason.
If we back to "sovereignty" and "immigration" as the prize worth paying, then that is an argument. It is still one that deserves further scrutiny once the scale of the economic damage becomes clearer.
When someone suggests we'll have "more success" if we leave the SM/CU - that can be debated. With the official government analysis.
"more success" it seems has more to do with keeping tory party unity hanging by a thread rather than what is best for the country.
But you are still prioritising the economy above all else.I've always taken jobs that pay more than the last one. Its usually a factor in the next step.
I'm not adverse to taking an income cut in some circumstances, but there has to be a good reason.
If we back to "sovereignty" and "immigration" as the prize worth paying, then that is an argument. It is still one that deserves further scrutiny once the scale of the economic damage becomes clearer.
When someone suggests we'll have "more success" if we leave the SM/CU - that can be debated. With the official government analysis.
"more success" it seems has more to do with keeping tory party unity hanging by a thread rather than what is best for the country.
The 'good reasons' people preferred where not the economy.
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
while i agree strongly with what you say,how much of that treatment is down to their own incompetence and actions ? it's a two way street. i really believe the majority of voters in most elections these days, from local upwards, are voting for the least worse option.We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
The Dangerous Elk said:
Fantastic result for Mrs May, to do so well in local elections in today's environment and with the type of work underway (fixing the st left by Labour/Brexit etc) is a big win and a reflection of how well "real people" feel about her/Tories.
You have a very short memory.t left by Labour/Brexit etc) is a big win and a reflection of how well "real people" feel about her/Tories.wc98 said:
loafer123 said:
I have said it elsewhere, but will repeat here;
We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
while i agree strongly with what you say,how much of that treatment is down to their own incompetence and actions ? it's a two way street. i really believe the majority of voters in most elections these days, from local upwards, are voting for the least worse option.We get the politicians we deserve.
We treat them like scum which means we end up with weak candidates, yet are asking them to do some of the most complex and difficult jobs in the country.
PurpleMoonlight said:
That really isn't true.
The leave campaign deliberately confused the issue by repeatedly claiming we would continue to have access to the single market. Some even claimed that our place in the single market was not at threat and free trade with the EU would continue. It took some pressing to get them to admit what you claim everyone knew.
I accept that those with some intelligence may have questioned what 'access' actually means but I would argue many will have thought it meant staying in the SM/SM.
And let's not forget everything the Government put out was labelled project fear, so why does that not include the claim the UK would have to leave the SM/CU?
All the EU action and usual excuses have moved to the TM thread. Thought it was quiet. I see non voting remainers are still peddling the Dan Hannan excuse. The leave campaign deliberately confused the issue by repeatedly claiming we would continue to have access to the single market. Some even claimed that our place in the single market was not at threat and free trade with the EU would continue. It took some pressing to get them to admit what you claim everyone knew.
I accept that those with some intelligence may have questioned what 'access' actually means but I would argue many will have thought it meant staying in the SM/SM.
And let's not forget everything the Government put out was labelled project fear, so why does that not include the claim the UK would have to leave the SM/CU?
You have one tiny desperate get-out of the whole referendum on a Dan Hannan interview you don't understand, and that was dug up after the result when looking for reversing the result. That's it.
Since you have such a faux concern for accuracy now, how many times did you see remainers on TV saying we would be giving up access to the SM ? I heard it virtually everyday.
Next we'll be onto the ' it wasn't on the ballot paper ' excuse. Shame no one mentioned it at the time the referendum was announced. My recollection was that Cameron was praised by both sides for playing fair with the question, but again, we have this retrospective remainer excuse hunt going on.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff