|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 9, 2020 19:25:34 GMT
I'm not sure what could have motivated anyone to have asked this question. Taking the knee in football is highly appropriate in the context of stamping out racism in football. Unlike Rugby or other sports, football has a history of rascist outbursts from its fans. The FA is specifically trying to address the issue.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 9, 2020 16:36:56 GMT
So what do people mke of tonight's meeting. Is it the last supper, or the amuse-bouche? Boris is pretty experienced at this. A few few glasses of wine then back to his hotel room. Then nine months later, the happy event. Churchill be damned! Our man's got much more form in this sort of diplomatic relations.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 9, 2020 13:49:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 9, 2020 9:39:21 GMT
But really in all this mess, the biggest problem and the one that really got me excited about it all was when a group of clever people tried to fiddle with a free and fair referendum. (As free and fair as any other election in this country which isn't without issues but is considered good enough). It really shocked me that so many of former friends (and some current) colleagues etc convinced themselves that their "right" version of European relations is more important than what some idiots and thickies voted for - i.e they must believe the issue at hand was more important than democracy itself. In fact it got me so fired up, I joined a political party just for the purpose of deposing our MP (which he duly was). You wrote a lot of stuff that just refights the referendum, but we are here now, so could you answer the original question?. There were two or three different visions of Brexit on offer. Which one did you think was going t be pursued? Whoch one did you most support? Are you happy with the current religious zeal for an ideologically pure Brexit at the expense of all else? This is an article discussing precisely this question:- www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/the-idea-of-sovereignty-is-nonsense-let-s-give-up-the-obsession-and-break-the-brexit-deadlock/ar-BB1bJIzy?ocid=msedgntpSo here is the problem. Having voted that we take off even though there were people pointing out that there was an engine on fire, those people are asking, did you have a preferred way of landing? and there is no answer.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 8, 2020 18:55:36 GMT
michaelc , may I ask you a sincere question - when you voted to leave, were you voting for a complete break from any direct relations with the EU, total sovereignty approach where Britain sets its own trade standards and insists that our trading partners accept them, making any trade relationship with the EU very barriered, or did you expect a less impeded trade relationship with the EU, like staying in the single market as outlined by leading Brexit fan Danial Hannon here:- www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII&feature=youtu.be&t=308Or Liam Fox's during the referendum advocated staying in a customs union as discussed here:- leave.eu/customs-union-approach/? Yep no problem. Not many others around these parts willing to support Leave. If I get a torrent of ridicule or as unfriendly as possible whilst staying within the rules of the board I shan't engage further. I can handle one or two bad apples but not a whole basket full Clearly I voted to leave the EU. The type of of "brexit" wasn't on the ballot and as I recall I didn't mind any kind of brexit so long as we left the EU. Thats all I voted for. I was actually in two minds seeing a lot of benefit of a partnership with our neighboring countries. I just didn't like and don't like the EU institutions. I have very close family in both the commission and the parliament (not elected) which helped inform my decision but the final straw was my very senior boss at the time suggesting how the employees might vote - he was american but in charge of all UK employees. It may have been a mistake - I hope not and time will tell. Either way, the EU absolutely should not make it difficult for members to leave. That is what is happening now. They shouldn't remain together based on fear of leaving. Member states should actively want to be members. But this is not about changing the institutions from within- its too late for that now! But really in all this mess, the biggest problem and the one that really got me excited about it all was when a group of clever people tried to fiddle with a free and fair referendum. (As free and fair as any other election in this country which isn't without issues but is considered good enough). It really shocked me that so many of former friends (and some current) colleagues etc convinced themselves that their "right" version of European relations is more important than what some idiots and thickies voted for - i.e they must believe the issue at hand was more important than democracy itself. In fact it got me so fired up, I joined a political party just for the purpose of deposing our MP (which he duly was). You wrote a lot of stuff that just refights the referendum, but we are here now, so could you answer the original question?. There were two or three different visions of Brexit on offer. Which one did you think was going t be pursued? Whoch one did you most support? Are you happy with the current religious zeal for an ideologically pure Brexit at the expense of all else? This is an article discussing precisely this question:- www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/the-idea-of-sovereignty-is-nonsense-let-s-give-up-the-obsession-and-break-the-brexit-deadlock/ar-BB1bJIzy?ocid=msedgntp
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 8, 2020 17:33:58 GMT
Of course any shortages will be entirely down to remainer panic buying. michaelc, may I ask you a sincere question - when you voted to leave, were you voting for a complete break from any direct relations with the EU, total sovereignty approach where Britain sets its own trade standards and insists that our trading partners accept them, making any trade relationship with the EU very barriered, or did you expect a less impeded trade relationship with the EU, like staying in the single market as outlined by leading Brexit fan Danial Hannon here:- www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII&feature=youtu.be&t=308Or Liam Fox's during the referendum advocated staying in a customs union as discussed here:- leave.eu/customs-union-approach/?
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 7, 2020 16:44:21 GMT
I was going to give the post above a Like but I played the vid and I didn't like it.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 7, 2020 11:26:53 GMT
To give a sense of my confidence in the UK economy going forward, I recently noticed that my Vanguard LifeStrategy fund has a 22% of the portfolio allocation in the UK, promptly sold it and invested in the Developed World ex-U.K fund instead. I imagine JAcob Rees Mogg is happy with the £ tanking, stacking up a fortune in those transfers into Euros made by his fund. I expect the financial advisors of all these politicians have insulated their portfolios by buying foreign assets. My work involves in part funding purchases form EU companies and being paid in £, so these are difficult times. Blood appears under my fingernails if I have to make a purchase of euros at under 1.10. TOday is one such bloody day. Still, the Pound in your pocket is still worth the same today, until the inflation surge devalues it further. Hate to be the chancellor sitting on that debt pile in those circumstances. But this is all just Project Fear, you know.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 7, 2020 10:36:50 GMT
Sterling down over 2 cents Markets less optimistic about a deal If we do end up leaving with no deal it will be one of the most egregious political failures in the UK's history. No, it's brilliant - the pound crashing against the Euro where we send 40% of our exports will make British export products cheaper. So when the tariff is added on, they are still competitive! These politicians who can't compromise on these seemingly simple to solve questions can't see the bigger picture because they are not involved in business or trade. They have not tried working with business leaders on Brexit because then they would have had to face reality, rather than the doctrinal purity of the Brexit that they say they that we the public have asked for.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 5, 2020 13:31:41 GMT
Yup, anyone who is born in the USA can run for the nomination of either party. Not sure that Trump was or is a registered Republican. In a way it's admirable, looking at some of the hacks the UK parties put up for election, but it does leave the field open for any charismatic looney to ride a passing wave of populist enthusiasm and essentially, capture the party.. Elon Musk comes to mind.... not in a good way. Definitely a looney. I love his entrepreneurial ventures but I wouldn't want him in charge of the US! I just hope getting to Mars consumes him or he finds another venture to do likewise. Charismatic simpleton then. The billionaires prefer to back a puppet rather then actually stand themselves. Larry Ellison, the Koch brothers, the Evangelical Church, all got it done by backing the candidate with least conscience and the biggest ego.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 5, 2020 12:37:16 GMT
Yep. They held their noses and supported him, and in return he's given them a religious-fundamentalist majority on the Supreme Court. Their aim was achieved with Coney Barrett's pushed-through confirmation, and he is now surplus to requirements. Pence would have been very acceptable to them, though, as one of their kind. Does anyone know how nominations for the Republican ticket in 2024 work (given DT has suggested he might run).
Is anyone allowed to throw their hats in the ring, or is there a panel of the great and good who could veto his involvement, for the greater good of the party.
Yup, anyone who is born in the USA can run for the nomination of either party. Not sure that Trump was or is a registered Republican. In a way it's admirable, looking at some of the hacks the UK parties put up for election, but it does leave the field open for any charismatic looney to ride a passing wave of populist enthusiasm and essentially, capture the party..
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 5, 2020 10:28:56 GMT
I would define a lie as deliberately saying something you know to be untrue. But in Trumps case, with a mind seeming so muddled and unable to take command of basic facts and concepts, it is hard to be sure that any one mistaken statement is in fact a lie. My hypothesis is this: That at a certain level he knows what he is doing. At an early stage, he came to an accommodation with the fundamentalist Christians in which he agreed to abandon his previous moral stances and work on their priorities in return for their electoral support. These Christians have a mindset predicated on belief that is not supported by facts. When the President makes assertions where the facts clearly point elsewhere (starting with the attendance at his inauguration), it affirms in the minds of the religious that facts can be disregarded, that this way of thinking is legitimate. The President defending his belief against all the facts that he has been re-elected is similar to their defending a belief in the almighty against what they would see is the same set of people in the world who believe in neither. Saying you don't believe in Trump is therefore practically the same as saying you don't believe in God.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 4, 2020 20:35:05 GMT
Reuters reported that a deal was imminent, only for that page to be removed and then the whole site going down.
Makes you wonder what they have been talking about for the last 2 weeks
"They're our fish now!" "No they arn't" "Are" "Arn't" "Are with knobs on" "Arn't with brass knobs on" (pause for lunch) What's interesting to consider is that in a no deal, Britain will insist in full sovereignty over its fishing area, but the EU trawlers will continue fishing as normal. Britain lacks the ships that could enforce its claim.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 4, 2020 18:37:29 GMT
adrianc is it just a co-incidence that the River Lugg SSSI is in the news today because it was removed by a bulldozer?
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 4, 2020 10:18:26 GMT
I believe this bounce has been caused because someone reported seeing a "large delivery of pizzas" to the discussions venue. Apparently the choice of toppings is a critical indicator of accord and discord. One had tuna, highly significant. A fish. It woz the anchovies wot wun it. It's not looking good. Overnight it seems the British would not share Frutti Di Mare.
|
|