Jenny1

Sparkler Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hello > > To the discussion of the march; is there a > community group from East Dulwich going? > Thanks > Sophie Hi Sophie. There may well be an ED group going - but I don't know of one. If you'd like to join a specific group, rather than joining the march in general, the Remainiacs podcast team (well worth a listen if you don't already) are inviting people to start the march with them at 12:00 near the 'Best for Britain' stand outside the Dorchester Hotel on Park Lane.

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Brexit has certainly created some strange > bedfellows. It has. I think it's also shown up how false our political parties are as entities. In an ideal world I'd like to see Labour and the Conservatives both split down the middle, if not into threes! As someone commented somewhere, one of the weaknesses of the first past the post system is that it's not down to the politicians to constantly negotiate and compromise with each other and form alliances , but it's left to the voters to deal with the weird contradictions and conflicts that their political parties constantly present them with.

Sorry - I checked back. Hammond was speaking in November. Didn't want to start arguing about that too!

I wasn't arguing about where we happen to sit right now in global economic rankings. We clearly teeter around the 5th, 6th mark. Philip Hammond famously put us sixth in December last year. I was just pointing out that amac probably meant 'global' not 'European' when referring to economic rankings. You were arguing vociferously that we were not ranked sixth in Europe - all I meant was that this was probably a misunderstanding of the point being made.

I think you can work it out. See above.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the 6th largest economy in Europe > I'd assumed a slip of the keyboard - reference to our global rather than European position?

It will be good to see a new painting on the bridge.

Yes. I think it was, partially. And in that spirit I wholeheartedly agree with it. But it did imply that everyone living in London is in a 'privileged' position.

flocker spotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > its ok EDF > > the jobs lost will be in the provinces. no need to > worry too much about things. You have the luxury > of detachment. Yes. Many do. But others, like me, on a small disability pension, do not. My main concern, like that of many people, is that the NHS and social care will be further eroded in the wake of the economic damage caused by Brexit.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why not ask "But isn't it mad to be spending time, > money and effort enacting a Brexit rather than > focusing on our approach to AI and the changes it > will bring?" > > The answer to that would likely be, 'it depends on > how advantageous to the UK in the long term the > Brexit would be'. But that's (apparently) not a > question you would ask because of the degree of > certainty in your own mind that eliminates any > balanced or enquiring consideration of such an > important issue. > There's no reason why you'd know this Robbin, but I've considered the issue a great deal. I think there's a big difference between attempting to predict the future (which is clearly impossible) and looking at all the information available and making a decision based on the facts available. As I said earlier, I have yet to see any sensible arguments as to why Brexit would benefit the UK - quite the reverse. My personal belief is that many people are prepared to wearily let Brexit happen because of the 'sunk-cost fallacy'. We've spent so much time, effort and money on it already that we simply must go ahead, no matter what the ultimate price. I don't like passive and fatalistic approaches like this.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JohnL Wrote: > ------------------------------------- > There are greater challenges to our economy than > Brexit in terms of rebalancing. In the medium to > long term the development of AI is highly likely > to be one of them, which may cause huge structural > adjustments as very large numbers of jobs become > redundant. But isn't it mad to be spending time, money and effort enacting a damaging Brexit rather than focusing on our approach to AI and the changes it will bring?

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >How, exactly will the > Netherlands be able to "quickly re-adjust it's > business models in the EU"? How? It already sells > as much as it can by way of exports to other EU > countries, surely? It can't just suddenly turn > around and replace lost exports (see my last post) > and it's nonsense to postulate otherwise. > > If (and I stress 'if') on the other hand Brexit > means new markets are opened up (which couldn't > previously be accessed in the same way, owing to > membership of the UE) then it may be easier to > replace lost exports to the Netherlands than it > would be for the Dutch to replace their lost > exports to the UK by somehow selling more to the > EU. > I probably should have said 'more easily' rather than 'quickly'. I'm not saying the process will be that rapid or indeed complete. But there's no getting away from the fact that the EU is a very large and effective free market that offer massive benefits to members. Also the Dutch are already picking up some of the business which is leaving the UK and seeking an alternative post-Brexit home. I'm glad you emphasise your 'If' in reference to new trade opportunities outside the EU. I have yet to see any convincing arguments that there will be any.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------ > ...more than a little > hysterical... We'll > have to wait and see what a no deal scenario > brings (if that's what happens) but I doubt the > sky will fall in (unless we all collectively will > it to do so). I think it's important not to conflate justified concern with hysteria. As to your final point I think it will probably depend on how you define 'the sky falling in'. I know the reference to 'collectively willing' was probably just a throw away remark - but it's important to remember that no event, negative or otherwise, was ever caused to happen by 'collective will', while a major change in circumstances often brings consequences.

robbin Wrote: -------------------------------------------- > If you think that's not something Holland and > certain other major EU nations are bothered about, > then I'd be interested in your explanation why > those figures are not relevant to this other side > of the argument. Of course no sane person in the Netherlands, or any other EU country (including the UK), wants to have to cope with the economic losses and dislocation that Brexit will cause. But the important difference between the Netherlands and the UK is that after Brexit (any kind of Brexit) the Netherlands will be in a position to quickly re-adjust its business models within the EU. We in the UK won't. So, as one sensible person put it, the economic damage of Brexit is, for the EU 27, like a bullet in the foot. For the UK, it's like a bullet to the head.

On the contrary. Certainly relevant. It's a senior French politician saying what no senior English politician (I advisedly do not say 'UK politician') has been brave enough to say. It's also an indication of how naive May's efforts to win over individual EU heads of state over the summer has been. Edited to make clear this in response to Flocker Spotter's post on Macron.

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm trying to work out why the arch-Brextremist > Telegraph ran this headline. Hard to be sure without seeing the full text of the article, but I would guess either 1) They temporarily remembered they're supposed to do some proper journalism, or 2) They figured all their readers instinctively hate the French so this will fire them up to further venom against 'Foreigners'.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don?t be taken in by EU PR about unity of the 27. > Word is, like rats fighting in a sack I doubt they're fighting in a sack as much as 'our' rats.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do know the Dutch are cr*pping themselves about > their aviation industry as well as other aspects > of their economy though. I doubt they're cr*pping themselves as much as UK business.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As if the Dutch PM knows what preparations > have/are taking place in the UK. Do you have information on these 'preparations' yourself Robbin? If so I'd like to know more about them.

A really useful guide in these circumstances is 'Has your House Got Cracks?'. The book was commissioned by the Institution of Civil Engineers and The Building Research Establishment and is a clear, straightforward guide for homeowners.

Ah. Sorry Robbin. I'd misunderstood you. I thought you were talking about the Twitter 'thread' written by David Allen Green, not this overall discussion thread. But as to the comments you and Joe Leg make. I think there's a difference between 'self-serving' - designed to increase the self esteem of the writer - and 'blinkered' - failing to take other points of view into account. And there seems to be me be a difference between people who operate very much from the 'heart' or from the 'head'. So sometimes you get emotion and belief packaged as factual argument. That's just annoying.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Although much of Twitter's pretty vacuous, more > thoughtful users do employ it for the propagation > of interesting and informative texts, either by > linking elsewhere or providing text in the form of > an accompanying picture, for example a screenshot > of a Word document. Yes. I don't post on twitter but I'm really pleased to have found it as a source of info. from technocrats.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I read newspapers (remember them?) Good idea. Me too.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Indeed. It could certainly apply to this > particular thread! It has to be by far the most > self-serving one on here. So what exactly do you find 'self-serving' about it?