Brexit discussion thread III

Nody

Aegir wrote: »

thousands of highly educated and extremely highly paid analysts all over the world are stupid?

Yes.

Over the last 15 years, 92.2% of large-cap funds lagged a simple S&P 500 index fund. The percentages of mid-cap and small-cap funds lagging their benchmarks were even higher: 95.4% and 93.2%, respectively.

But they do great spin to get paid for it and most have short runs making money before they are fired and the next guy gets a run.

Econ_

Hurrache wrote: »

RTE News earlier said that basically those at today's meeting aren't getting out until they've come to an agreement on where they want to go re Brexit.

Prepare for a Boris Johnson resignation.

flutered

Skedaddle wrote: »

I think they're grossly underestimating the risk of very significant inflation. You can't deconstruct and rebuild supply chains that quickly and also there's a huge risk to GBP if the markets turn on it.

Also without any details of what's happening, supply chains can't even adapt ahead of time.

What worries me is that the political figures seem to think that the markets are 'intelligent' or think long term. They can be remarkably shortsighted and can react violently anything they perceive as risk. At the moment I think the UK's getting the benefit of the doubt because many investors and traders don't really believe that Brexit will happen and certainly not a hard Brexit.

If you prove them wrong on this, they'll probably react quite dramatically by just flipping the switch on investments both in currency trades and British assets.

you are quite correct as regards food supply, just look at the present kfc fiasco, which they were told would happen

Leroy42

Speaking on Sky News, Crispin Blunt said: “It is inconceivable that the other 26 nations of the European Union are going to throw the Republic of Ireland under the bus, whose relationship with the UK is absolutely critical to them, and not find some kind of special relationship that is going to preserve to all practical extent possible the sustaining of the Good Friday agreement with a cross-border arrangement and not having a hard border."

But it is perfectly conceivable that the UK will do it!

4068ac1elhodqr

Things can't get much worse for the Tories, the whole charade over recent years smells of sabotage.

Now after Mr Stormy/stormz/stormzies/windyman called May out at the Brit awards on the overdue/missing funds for those burnt towers.

...William Hill have offered 10/1 that the Stormy runs for the office of 'London Mayor in 2020'. Or 33/1 that he actually wins.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

May should go over to the EU and ask them what the best they can give the UK (they have pretty much told them the options already). Forget about a negotiation, the UK has no leverage. Put the options to the parliament. Select one option from the menu. Give a free vote and accept that whatever is chosen is the basis for future talks.

This may be what is happening currently, with the UK asking for a deal and the EU asking the UK what it wants. This gets repeated round and round and why so much time is wasted.

Angela Merkel 'ridicules Theresa May's Brexit demands during secret press briefing

Speaking to a “secret” press meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Ms Merkel claimed Ms May had repeatedly asked her to “make me an offer”, according to a report by ITV political pundit Robert Peston.

Ms Merkel said that when she replied “but you’re leaving – we don’t have to make you an offer. Come on what do you want?”, Ms May replied again, “Make me an offer.”

“And so, according to Mrs Merkel, the two find themselves trapped in a recurring loop of ‘what do you want?’ and ‘make me an offer’,” Mr Peston wrote on his Facebook page.

But while journalists laughed at the exchange, others have been quick to suggest the conversation, if it took place as reported, should worry those hoping Britain is on course to secure a prosperous future trading relationship with the EU.

Econ_ wrote: »

Prepare for a Boris Johnson resignation.

Or an resignation from Philip Hammond is just as likely.

Panrich

Leroy42 wrote: »

Speaking on Sky News, Crispin Blunt said: “It is inconceivable that the other 26 nations of the European Union are going to throw the Republic of Ireland under the bus, whose relationship with the UK is absolutely critical to them, and not find some kind of special relationship that is going to preserve to all practical extent possible the sustaining of the Good Friday agreement with a cross-border arrangement and not having a hard border."

But it is perfectly conceivable that the UK will do it!

They really don't get it even at this stage. They are still waiting for the EU to blink and that they'll have their cake and eat it.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Net Migration is down, and you are marking it as a positive...

I'm not marking it as anything, I am just pointing out facts.

There are more EU citizens in the UK now than there were twelve months ago.

listermint wrote: »

Hilarious stuff buddy. Sorry but thats just madness, Its down simply because the whole economy is slowing and it may slow into a stupper within the year.

the building industry is slowing down, after a boom. Net immigration shot up five years ago as the UK economy was the first EU one to show any growth, now that the others are growing, it is logical that a lot of people are returning home, is it not?

J Mysterio

Dario Melted Sunlamp wrote: »

Things can't get much worse for the Tories, the whole charade over recent years smells of sabotage.

Now after Mr Stormy/stormz/stormzies/windyman called May out at the Brit awards on the overdue/missing funds for those burnt towers.

...William Hill have offered 10/1 that the Stormy runs for the office of 'London Mayor in 2020'. Or 33/1 that he actually wins.

Those are horrible odds!

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

I'm not marking it as anything, I am just pointing out facts.

There are more EU citizens in the UK now than there were twelve months ago.

the building industry is slowing down, after a boom. Net immigration shot up five years ago as the UK economy was the first EU one to show any growth, now that the others are growing, it is logical that a lot of people are returning home, is it not?

They are leaving because the UK is turning into a basket case where people no longer feel welcome or that they have a future or security. The spin you are desperately trying to put on everything here is bizarre. Like polishing a turd.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

Net Migration is down, and you are marking it as a positive...

I'm not marking it as anything, I am just pointing out facts.

There are more EU citizens in the UK now than there were twelve months ago.

listermint wrote: »

Hilarious stuff buddy. Sorry but thats just madness, Its down simply because the whole economy is slowing and it may slow into a stupper within the year.

the building industry is slowing down, after a boom. Net immigration shot up five years ago as the UK economy was the first EU one to show any growth, now that the others are growing, it is logical that a lot of people are returning home, is it not?

There's a few other pertinent facts;

Net EU immigration is at its lowest for 5 years; net non-EU immigration is at its highest for 6.

EU citizens in the UK have an employment rate of 82%. That is higher than the rate for UK nationals (75%) and a good bit higher than non-EU citizens (63%).

Put those sets of numbers together and extrapolate the trends and see what its telling you.

steddyeddy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Speaking on Sky News, Crispin Blunt said: “It is inconceivable that the other 26 nations of the European Union are going to throw the Republic of Ireland under the bus, whose relationship with the UK is absolutely critical to them, and not find some kind of special relationship that is going to preserve to all practical extent possible the sustaining of the Good Friday agreement with a cross-border arrangement and not having a hard border."

But it is perfectly conceivable that the UK will do it!

The special arrangement is so amazing that the British politicians have recently suggested we get rid of the GFA, the thing that brought about peace on the northern part of the island. They've also suggested that we're making trouble when we insisted on a guarantee about the border. Not so special at the moment.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

There's a few other pertinent facts;

Net EU immigration is at its lowest for 5 years; net non-EU immigration is at its highest for 6.

EU citizens in the UK have an employment rate of 82%. That is higher than the rate for UK nationals (75%) and a good bit higher than non-EU citizens (63%).

Put those sets of numbers together and extrapolate the trends and see what its telling you.

EU citizens come to the UK to work and when they can't, go home or to another EU country. Their ability to move freely across Europe means they go wherever they can earn the most money.

PopePalpatine

Dario Melted Sunlamp wrote: »

Things can't get much worse for the Tories, the whole charade over recent years smells of sabotage.

Now after Mr Stormy/stormz/stormzies/windyman called May out at the Brit awards on the overdue/missing funds for those burnt towers.

...William Hill have offered 10/1 that the Stormy runs for the office of 'London Mayor in 2020'. Or 33/1 that he actually wins.

You're assuming the Tories know what a "Stormzy" is, that's your mistake.

Also, bringing odds into it reminds me of the bookies cashing in on the hype around Oprah 2020.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

There's a few other pertinent facts;

Net EU immigration is at its lowest for 5 years; net non-EU immigration is at its highest for 6.

EU citizens in the UK have an employment rate of 82%. That is higher than the rate for UK nationals (75%) and a good bit higher than non-EU citizens (63%).

Put those sets of numbers together and extrapolate the trends and see what its telling you.

EU citizens come to the UK to work and when they can't, go home or to another EU country. Their ability to move freely across Europe means they go wherever they can earn the most money.

I don't think you quite got the point.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

EU citizens come to the UK to work and when they can't, go home or to another EU country. Their ability to move freely across Europe means they go wherever they can earn the most money.

Exactly. So why are all wailing and gnashing of teeth during the campaign. Economy does well, more EU people come in to fill the job gaps, when the economy falls, they leave (to return home or somewhere else).

Why is that such a problem for the British people? It allows those with the skills to build a life, plan a future and integrate. For those that don't get on they move elsewhere.

What the British seem to what is that only the worker (ie not the family) would come over, and only be there so as long as they are deemed necessary. Therefore you won't get people with families (who tend to be the more experienced & skilled as they are older) and those that come won't feel any need to integrate as they know they are only there for a short time

CelticRambler

Aegir wrote: »

Net immigration shot up five years ago as the UK economy was the first EU one to show any growth, now that the others are growing, it is logical that a lot of people are returning home, is it not?

It may be logical for economic migrants to "return home" but if you look at the detail, the number of Brits leaving the UK is greater than all of the "New EU" migrants combined, the ones so maligned in the press; and also greater than the number of "Old EU" (EEC/EU15). This net exodus of 52000 Brits obviously aren't going home ...

More to the point is the fact that net migration of non EU migrants has increased. So Africans, Asians and Americans still see Britain as some kind of promised land. Good job too - BoJo's counting on their home economies to sustain Britain's export market.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Exactly. So why are all wailing and gnashing of teeth during the campaign. Economy does well, more EU people come in to fill the job gaps, when the economy falls, they leave (to return home or somewhere else).

Why is that such a problem for the British people? It allows those with the skills to build a life, plan a future and integrate. For those that don't get on they move elsewhere.

What the British seem to what is that only the worker (ie not the family) would come over, and only be there so as long as they are deemed necessary. Therefore you won't get people with families (who tend to be the more experienced & skilled as they are older) and those that come won't feel any need to integrate as they know they are only there for a short time

err 52% of British people, if that. In fact, the number is likely to be much lower and even that should actually be "People in Britain who were eligible to vote in the referendum".

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2016/jun/18/eu-vote-brexit-working-people-rents-wages

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

err 52% of British people, if that. In fact, the number is likely to be much lower and even that should actually be "People in Britain who were eligible to vote in the referendum".

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2016/jun/18/eu-vote-brexit-working-people-rents-wages

The University of Oxford and Migration Watch both did studies and found minimal detrimental impact on the wages of local people from EU immigration.

Hearing those complaints doesn't make them true. Wages have fallen behind inflation for a long time now and that, twinned with soaring demand for housing which is partly driven by immigration is what has squeezed the incomes of many lower-to-mid income people.

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2016/jun/18/eu-vote-brexit-working-people-rents-wages

The complaints from industry is that they cant get the skills they need.

From nurses to fruitpickers and everything else.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

err 52% of British people, if that. In fact, the number is likely to be much lower and even that should actually be "People in Britain who were eligible to vote in the referendum".

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2016/jun/18/eu-vote-brexit-working-people-rents-wages

Its the democratic will of the people. That has been the refrain since the vote, the 48% lost and need to get on with it so I am quite entitled to claim that the British see immigration as a significant issue.

And in terms of the type of immigration, the policy being pursued (ie that only those with granted visas, short term, tied to specific needs, is far more likely to result in the exact type they are complaining about (young, willing to work for less pay, short term)

CelticRambler

Aegir wrote: »

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

OK .... So how does the migration of qualified Europeans to England affect wages and rents in the US? Because wages in the US are lagging behind inflation while rent and other costs of living are increasing. Some people have a habit of confusing causes and effects.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The University of Oxford and Migration Watch both did studies and found minimal detrimental impact on the wages of local people from EU immigration.

Hearing those complaints doesn't make them true. Wages have fallen behind inflation for a long time now and that, twinned with soaring demand for housing which is partly driven by immigration is what has squeezed the incomes of many lower-to-mid income people.

there are a number of factors, of course. the UoO study does clearly state though, that immigration has minimal effect overall, but has a negative impact on the lower paid. Compare this to who it was that typically voted to leave the EU.....

CelticRambler wrote: »

OK .... So how does the migration of qualified Europeans to England affect wages and rents in the US? Because wages in the US are lagging behind inflation while rent and other costs of living are increasing. Some people have a habit of confusing causes and effects.

no idea, maybe you should ask the Guardian journo who wrote the article.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

The complaints from industry is that they cant get the skills they need.

From nurses to fruitpickers and everything else.

in all honesty, I have never met a Polish nurse. Indian, Filipino, Caribbean, Irish, but never Polish.

Hospital porters and cleaners though, i have met loads of Poles doing those jobs.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

there are a number of factors, of course. the UoO study does clearly state though, that immigration has minimal effect overall, but has a negative impact on the lower paid. Compare this to who it was that typically voted to leave the EU.....

Right but the way it was spun by Vote Leave and especially Farage & Leave.EU was that cutting immigration to the bone would restore pay and living costs to what they were before.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Right but the way it was spun by Vote Leave and especially Farage & Leave.EU was that cutting immigration to the bone would restore pay and living costs to what they were before.

The problem is, if someone has seen their wages rise below inflation and their rent go up, they are more likely to listen to the likes of Farage.

Enzokk

Aegir wrote: »

there are a number of factors, of course. the UoO study does clearly state though, that immigration has minimal effect overall, but has a negative impact on the lower paid. Compare this to who it was that typically voted to leave the EU.....

Are you saying that those that voted to leave the EU is a majority of lower paid people? Does that mean the middle class voted to Remain? What about the upper class? Where do you get the information for this?

I think the problem is more the fall of standards for all people in the UK, regardless of class except for the rich. This is not an EU problem and I think trying to tie lower wages with immigrants from the EU is silly, especially now after this has been mainly disproved. The study I believe finds that if EU immigrants has an effect on lower wages it is their fellow immigrants that will feel it as they compete for the same jobs.

4068ac1elhodqr

PopePalpatine wrote: »

You're assuming the Tories know what a "Stormzy" is, that's your mistake.

Also, bringing odds into it reminds me of the bookies cashing in on the hype around Oprah 2020.

They probably don't indeed know anything about the storm (Michael Ebenazer Kwadjo Omari Owuo Jr), and that's 'their' mistake.

DS actually had to issue a statement today,insisting the PM was “absolutely committed” to supporting survivors of the inferno yada yada...

Of course he has no real chance, but it does show the undercurrent of dissatisfaction, when folks prefer to listen to him and the former oasis knuckledragger rather than any established opinion

If Corbyn ever gets rid of that dire Diane Abbot idiot, he could win the next election hands down, and is currently the favourite to do so in many instances


William Hill have him with a very short 1/3rd chance of being the next PM.

Oprah had a bit of 10/1 chance, until all those photos of her hugging her weinerstien fiend emerged, probably lacks the physical campaign energy anyway.

Enzokk

Enzokk wrote: »

Are you saying that those that voted to leave the EU is a majority of lower paid people? Does that mean the middle class voted to Remain? What about the upper class? Where do you get the information for this?

Ignoring old people, then the higher the level of education, the more likely someone was to vote remain. it isn't a massive leap to link that to level of wages.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted/

Roanmore

Aegir wrote: »

The complaints I have heard, is that the type of immigration from Europe creates a race to the bottom. A young couple looking to work for a few years and save up can afford to work for less than people who have a family to support, so can undercut the local labour force.

Surely the race to the bottom is exacerbated by the non EU immigration.

Was it Sky who did a piece on the Asian community getting ready to ship in loads of relatives to work in their businesses at rock bottom prices. They showed a bunch of illegal immigrants who were not getting paid at all except for food and a place to live (overcrowded).

Roanmore

Roanmore wrote: »

Surely the race to the bottom is exacerbated by the non EU immigration.

Was it Sky who did a piece on the Asian community getting ready to ship in loads of relatives to work in their businesses at rock bottom prices. They showed a bunch of illegal immigrants who were not getting paid at all except for food and a place to live (overcrowded).

not really. An immigrant from Pakistan can't just turn up without a job and take the first thing they can find. There is obviously a discussion around some of the restaurant scams, but typically non EU migrants would need a job to come to and would need some form of reason to enter the UK.

Illegal immigrants are something different again.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

Ignoring old people, then the higher the level of education, the more likely someone was to vote remain. it isn't a massive leap to link that to level of wages.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted/

Ignoring old people is impossible given that they wield a huge amount of political influence. Obviously, this wouldn't be an issue in a world where more people felt that voting is important but we don't live in that world sadly.

Sand

J Mysterio wrote: »

The complaints from industry is that they cant get the skills they need.

From nurses to fruitpickers and everything else.

So they should pay to train them. An immigration policy dictated by corporate interests is not beneficial to anyone but the corporate shareholders. And in the long run, not even to them.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ignoring old people is impossible given that they wield a huge amount of political influence. Obviously, this wouldn't be an issue in a world where more people felt that voting is important but we don't live in that world sadly.

Old people die at a quicker rate than young people. The demographics are against the Tories. Hopefully.

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Old people die at a quicker rate than young people. The demographics are against the Tories. Hopefully.

People have been using this logic for years. But the reality is that we become more conservative as we get older so in effect the old dying out get replaced by the middle aged , who get replaced by the young, who get replaced by a new wave of voters. But nothing significantly changes.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

People have been using this logic for years. But the reality is that we become more conservative as we get older so in effect the old dying out get replaced by the middle agreed, who get replaced by the young, who get replaced by a new wave of voters. But nothing significantly changes.

Interesting article here. In the last election, only 1 in 5 voters aged 18-25 voted Tory and as to your point:

There is some evidence that people become slightly more conservative as they get older, but this “life-cycle” effect is potentially offset by a “cohort effect” — the idea that, since generations carry their early political preferences with them as they age, any party that loses young voters will pay a high price as time passes.

Also, there is, more or less, a direct correlation between voting Tory and age, the older you are the more likely you are to vote Tory. I think this is especially important if there were to be any form of Brexit rerun or a general election in the next two years. Macabre reasons to be cheerful.

demfad

Leroy42 wrote: »

People have been using this logic for years. But the reality is that we become more conservative as we get older so in effect the old dying out get replaced by the middle aged , who get replaced by the young, who get replaced by a new wave of voters. But nothing significantly changes.

There is a general change in culture and outlook though. Older people now are just about still in the WW2 or just post WW2 generation. That was when the British identity was very strong.

The next aging generation will be less conservative than the previous one.
Either the Conservative party changes accordingly, or they lose vote share.

Sam Russell

demfad wrote: »

There is a general change in culture and outlook though. Older people now are just about still in the WW2 or just post WW2 generation. That was when the British identity was very strong.

The next aging generation will be less conservative than the previous one.
Either the Conservative party changes accordingly, or they lose vote share.

I think the 'older' voters are the baby boomers, and those that were getting around in the sixties, where flower power was the flavour of the time. I would have thought they would not be strongly Tory in attitude, but they are also the ones that now have substantial wealth due to the house price rises over the last 40 years. So having more to lose, may make them more conservative, but hopefully not more Conservative.

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Old people die at a quicker rate than young people. The demographics are against the Tories. Hopefully.

This is not quite true. Baby-making plateaued in the West about 30-40 years ago, but OAPs have stopped dying so the older voters just keep getting older (hence the paradox of continued global population growth in the face of falling birthrates).

Professor Moriarty

CelticRambler wrote: »

This is not quite true. Baby-making plateaued in the West about 30-40 years ago, but OAPs have stopped dying so the older voters just keep getting older (hence the paradox of continued global population growth in the face of falling birthrates).

Well, I'm not a statistician so I can't factor those two elements into the demographics or offer an opinion as to how relevant they are. However, the Tory party itself is extremely worried about its aging voters.

Christy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

This has me surprised as well. I am far from being any sort of expert on the markets, but all the current signals point to a hard Brexit and that whatever Brexit does happen is likely to be negative from the UK and the EU.

So are the markets simply hoping that it won't happen, or are they playing a game of first the blink?

I can't see any justification for market optimism.

A: it looks like a hard Brexit will not happen for quite some time.

B: the UK is still a serviceable trading partner until it happens. There is no reason to not buy the pound for short term reasons.

ancapailldorcha

Valid points there. I recall reading in Tim Shipman's Fall Out that the age at which someone became more like to vote Conservative than Labour in 2015 was 34. In 2017, it was 47. That's grim reading for the Conservative party as one's thirties are the age when one normally has accumulated some degree of wealth and has solidified their goals for the rest of their life.

Margaret Thatcher believed in a property owning democracy which I believe is one of the reasons why so much social housing stock was sold off. However, now there is a different problem. The Conservatives have to sell the status quo to younger Brits and other people living here. These people are aging and will be wondering what the future will hold. The old idea of getting a degree to increase one's income with the goal of obtaining a property is all but dead save for cases where the bank of Mum and Dad steps in. Thus, there is no reason for house sharers in their thirties to vote Conservative when Labour is offering to build social housing, cap rents, make having pets a right in rental properties and so on and so forth.

Then there is Brexit. Brexit will most likely deprive today's younger, more adventurous Brits the right to live and work in 27 other EU countries. It might even deprive older Brits to retire in those same countries. Brexit was brought about by a growing rift in the Conservative party twinned with economic stagnation and other problems in Europe. David Cameron, a man used to winning gambles rolled the dice on the greatest stakes of his premiership and lost. There was no plan post-referendum for how to implement the Leave vote. Depending on who you are, you either want a Singapore-on-Thames, a Socialist utopia or, somehow a bit of both.

Finally, look at the crop of hopefuls looking to succeed Mrs. May. The forerunner seems to be one Jacob Rees-Mogg. Rees-Mogg epitomises everything wrong with the Conservative party and represents the very toxicity that David Cameron had seemed to have excised. Alas. Rees-Mogg is not a man of notable enterprise or ingenuity. He's a backbencher who's achieved nothing of note that I am aware of aside from propounding highly controversial and very much beyond the political mainstream opinions which were put to bed many decades ago. His only challenge of note that I can see is defending his Catholic faith in the circles he moves in.

I might be inclined to look at someone like Ruth Davidson for hope but she represents everything that Conservatives such as Rees-Mogg despise and for that reason her leadership would be untenable if she even made it that far.

The state of British politics can hardly be ascribed to the Conservative party alone, however. I regard Jeremy Corbyn and Labour as being all but complicit in the Leave win of 2016 with particular emphasis on members of Corbyn's inner circle such as John McDonnell and Seumas Milne. They either actively want Brexit or are happy enough to let it pass to enable them to get to number 10.

If Nick Clegg and the tuition fees are anything to go by, both main parties need to try and fix things with younger voters and soon. The Conservatives need to give them enough justification to vote Blue while Labour need to either sort out their stance on Brexit (much like the government) or come up with a damn good explanation why rights enjoyed under EU membership will come to an end.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Old people die at a quicker rate than young people. The demographics are against the Tories. Hopefully.

‘One thing which is just worth having in mind: 2 per cent of the older part of the electorate die every year - they are 70 per cent Conservative’
- Lord Heseltine

Water John

There are a lot of good conservative voices, but they have been drowned out, at this point.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

not really. An immigrant from Pakistan can't just turn up without a job and take the first thing they can find. There is obviously a discussion around some of the restaurant scams, but typically non EU migrants would need a job to come to and would need some form of reason to enter the UK.

Illegal immigrants are something different again.

Then please explain how/why only 63% of non-EU immigrants (who you say need to have a job to be allowed enter) are in employment whereas 82% of EU immigrants (who can enter freely) are in jobs and contributing to the economy?

And if current trends continue and Brexit achieves the intended reduction in EU immigrants, who is going to do the jobs they now fill?

LeinsterDub

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Valid points there. I recall reading in Tim Shipman's Fall Out that the age at which someone became more like to vote Conservative than Labour in 2015 was 34. In 2017, it was 47. That's grim reading for the Conservative party as one's thirties are the age when one normally has accumulated some degree of wealth and has solidified their goals for the rest of their life.

I'm not sure one can extract a greater trend from such a small data set

ArmaniJeanss

The Chequers conclave has ended, though we won't get an official result until a speech by TMPM scheduled for next week. Obviously we'll get a dozen leaks in the meantime though.

Earliest tweets from reporters from initial briefings are that the cakeists have won the day. "Divergence is the victor" according to The Suns James Forsyth.

Water John

Came up in QT on BBC1. KFC a precursor to Brexit type problems.

Looks like LB will stay very close or in the CU.

Infini

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The Chequers conclave has ended, though we won't get an official result until a speech by TMPM scheduled for next week. Obviously we'll get a dozen leaks in the meantime though.

Earliest tweets from reporters from initial briefings are that the cakeists have won the day. "Divergence is the victor" according to The Suns James Forsyth.

Hard Brexit by Ignorant Gobshytes it is then....

All it would take is for the EU to basically say "no deal" for the real effects to kick in at this stage.

CelticRambler

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Then there is Brexit. Brexit will most likely deprive today's younger, more adventurous Brits the right to live and work in 27 other EU countries. It might even deprive older Brits to retire in those same countries.
...

The state of British politics can hardly be ascribed to the Conservative party alone, however. I regard Jeremy Corbyn and Labour as being all but complicit in the Leave win of 2016 with particular emphasis on members of Corbyn's inner circle such as John McDonnell and Seumas Milne.

Those two factors - a younger, arguably more European, UK electorate, and a dysfunctional two-party system - are the reason I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a new Macron-esque modern party emerge in the coming decade.