General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

McMurphy

£50 on another hung parliament here.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

come on, you know that was in actual fact just an advance to give the DUP something to crow about.

Not my point. Nobody was asking where it came from. It was just accepted.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And if Leave win you have a disgruntled remain side that won't be going anywhere.

Remain fixes nothing save for averting disaster. Tackling inequality and people's reasons for voting to leave have to be the next step.

Labour had the opportunity to at least offer a referendum that gives both sides an option, even if they believe one to be economically damaging.

It should be Labour's deal -- with their close alignment and whatnot -- versus a Clean Break Brexit.

That way, it honours the 2016 result whilst also giving "the People" the final say on the question.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Labour had the opportunity to at least offer a referendum that gives both sides an option, even if they believe one to be economically damaging.

It should be Labour's deal -- with their close alignment and whatnot -- versus a Clean Break Brexit.

That way, it honours the 2016 result whilst also giving "the People" the final say on the question.

Too much time has passed to give that 52% victory legitimacy for a deal/no deal referendum.

Too many people have gone on record to say they changed their mind.

If it's a hung parliament, the Tories cannot say they have a mandate to exit EU whatever the cost

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

Labour had the opportunity to at least offer a referendum that gives both sides an option, even if they believe one to be economically damaging.

It should be Labour's deal -- with their close alignment and whatnot -- versus a Clean Break Brexit.

That way, it honours the 2016 result whilst also giving "the People" the final say on the question.

When did this Clean Dirty Break Brexit become a thing again? Wasn't until long after the referendum that there was any mention of having a no deal was mentioned, so why would that become an option in a referendum on a final say.

There was a vote between something that didn't exist and remain where the result was 52/48. There are now options of what Leave actually means in existence. To have a "final say" you put up the now existing Leave option back against the Remain option and ask the question "Are you sure?".

You don't invent a totally new question of trying to figure out what leave means still. At the moment the UK is still a member of the EU so the choice about should they remain a member of the EU still stands and Leave have to make their case for what it means, not continue with saying it means whatever you want it to mean and we'll figure it out later...maybe.

Zubeneschamali

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Hislop and Merton were bemoaning their role in enabling politicians to present themselves as jolly chaps on the last episode.
I have to say I never understood why they invited 'serving' politicos be be on - retired no issue with that - but imho the still sitting ones (of all hues) should be the targets not the shooters as it were.

In fairness he was a target, they used to rip the piss out of Johnson when he came on.

But it didn't hurt him.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Too much time has passed to give that 52% victory legitimacy for a deal/no deal referendum.

Too many people have gone on record to say they changed their mind.

If it's a hung parliament, the Tories cannot say they have a mandate to exit EU whatever the cost

Far more of a mandate than a second referendum from Labour or complete nullification from the Lib Dems.

If Johnson doesn't secure the right, what gives Corbyn a mandate?

Zubeneschamali

Aegir wrote: »

what will this do to the price of groceries in the supermarket?

You mean if profits, dividends and executive payouts stay the same?

Because that is the point - owners and bosses are pocketing the money made from extra productivity instead of either paying workers more or working them less.

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

and we can fix all that by growing magic money trees I suppose?

Perhaps growing magic money trees wouldn't be needed if the Tories stopped "spaffing money against the wall"

Brexit 50p's:
https://www.cityam.com/brexit-meltdown-government-destroys-commemorative-50p-coins/

8.3Billion on no deal planning:
https://www.ft.com/content/ecae4690-ce6a-11e9-b018-ca4456540ea6

The "snap" general election that cost 140 million
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41258026

Need I go on? There's many more instances of Tory's wildly spending money while cutting services.

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

Far more of a mandate than a second referendum from Labour or complete nullification from the Lib Dems.

If Johnson doesn't secure the right, what gives Corbyn a mandate?

How does 52% voting for something in a dodgy referendum 4 years ago have more validity than holding a new one where there are two clear options to pick between?

In fact there is never anything wrong with holding another referendum on anything in order to discover what the population actually thinks on an individual topic, assuming it is held correctly and asks a sensible question.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Far more of a mandate than a second referendum from Labour or complete nullification from the Lib Dems.

If Johnson doesn't secure the right, what gives Corbyn a mandate?

If Labour, and LD's were somehow to form a coalition, that's precisely what their mandate would be l.

BP is polling at 0 seats, who else bar them and the Tories are saying let's get Brexit done?

BonnieSituation

Aegir wrote: »

A supermarket chain employs 10,000 people on £9 per hour across their supermarkets.

in the future they will have to employ 12,500 people and pay them £10 per hour.

what will this do to the price of groceries in the supermarket?

A) make them cheaper
make them more expensive
C) make them a hell of a lot more expensive
D) tax everyone on £80k more so they can pay for it

taking in to consideration, of course, that all companies involved in the supply chain are also facing the same considerations.

Your simplistic economics aside...

Are you a supermarket? No you are not. You are an individual.

Why would you not want to work less for similar money?

For the greater good? Doesn't really stack up now does it.

whatawaster

Deleted User wrote: »

If Labour, and LD's were somehow to form a coalition, that's precisely what their mandate would be l.

BP is polling at 0 seats, who else bar them and the Tories are saying let's get Brexit done?

DUP?

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And if Leave win you have a disgruntled remain side that won't be going anywhere.

Remain fixes nothing save for averting disaster. Tackling inequality and people's reasons for voting to leave have to be the next step.

so why bother having a referendum if it fixes nothing?

Get the WA agreed and move to negotiations on a trade deal so Parliament can get on with doing the job it is supposed to, which is running the country.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Not my point. Nobody was asking where it came from. It was just accepted.

sorry, i didn't think you had a point, just an attempt at grabbing a few thanks.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You mean if profits, dividends and executive payouts stay the same?

Because that is the point - owners and bosses are pocketing the money made from extra productivity instead of either paying workers more or working them less.

so now we are going to nationalise all supermarkets?
How else would you stop this?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Your simplistic economics aside...

Are you a supermarket? No you are not. You are an individual.

Why would you not want to work less for similar money?

For the greater good? Doesn't really stack up now does it.

oh yeah, it sounds great on paper and is a lovely way of grabbing a few votes from people who might actually believe it can happen.

anyone who believes it though, does not understand simple economics

IAmTheReign

Aegir wrote: »

the WA only goes away when the UK cancels article 50, or leaves the eu.

The only way the current WA is going to get approved is if the Torys get an overall majority.

4068ac1elhodqr

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

£50 on another hung parliament here.

Hope you got the early prices:
All markets have shorted <24/48hrs and overnight, and will continue, until (Sunderland) early live event.

Very small mixed acca-build line selections:
Most Seats: Lab @15
Con: 35.00-39.99% @7
Lab: 40.00-44.99% @12
Lab Proj' Seats: +218.5 @1.83

VTO: 60.00-64.99% @3.25
VTO: 65.54% or lower @1.9
Next PM: JC @4.5
NOM (hung): @4

Small (Novelty) singles:
Lab Maj: @26
Lab Min: @7.5

Main (shop) singles, and special focus is NI constitutes, where both SF&DUP to suffer in a few markets when placed close against all others.

Bannasidhe

Aegir wrote: »

so it is irrelevant to the point I was making then?

Nice try.

You claimed supermarkets, for example, will shed staff due to Labour's policies.
I pointed out that supermarkets have been shedding staff and increased automation has enabled them to do this.

Labour's policy re 4 day week is to take account of the increased use of automation by the likes of supermarkets that has allowed them to already shed so much staff with relative ease.

IAmTheReign

Aegir wrote: »

so why bother having a referendum if it fixes nothing?

Get the WA agreed and move to negotiations on a trade deal so Parliament can get on with doing the job it is supposed to, which is running the country.

You have the referendum because Brexit will make things worse.

Why would a coalition pass the WA when they don't agree with it just for the sake of moving on? That makes no sense.

IAmTheReign

IAmTheReign wrote: »

The only way the current WA is going to get approved is if the Torys get an overall majority.

Even then it isn't a given.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Nice try.

You claimed supermarkets, for example, will shed staff due to Labour's policies.
I pointed out that supermarkets have been shedding staff and increased automation has enabled them to do this.

Labour's policy re 4 day week is to take account of the increased use of automation by the likes of supermarkets that has allowed them to already shed so much staff with relative ease.

i didn't though. I was trying to explain how Labour's plans would affect the price of groceries and are therefore just pie in the sky stuff. You added the bit about efficiencies helping make them less costly.

Letwin_Larry

Strazdas wrote: »

A hung parliament will kill Brexit stone dead though. The public rejecting the 'Get Brexit Done' manifesto will be the end of it.....there's no chance the public would vote to leave in any future referendum if they've already voted against a WA that was on offer to them.

no this whole Brexit fiasco isn't going anywhere soon imo. hung parliament or not. likewise the remain camp. if anything both camps will ramp up their rhetoric.
you just got to look at the contrary comments on here to see that.

both sides will claim some kind of victory, or at least "we were not defeated".

and of course a lot will depend on the actual numbers, and who are likely to be the "King makers" and what price they will exact.

mind you if Boris gets his sought after overall majority, it's not the end of Brexit by a long shot. just the end of the beginning.

Bannasidhe

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In fairness he was a target, they used to rip the piss out of Johnson when he came on.

But it didn't hurt him.

Ah, but it allowed Johnson to polish his image as a lovable buffoon who is a jolly good sport.

IAmTheReign

IAmTheReign wrote: »

You have the referendum because Brexit will make things worse.

Will it? the UK could negotiate a trade deal with the EU, the US etc that makes things a lot better.

No one can say with 100% conviction what Brexit means, because it hasn't happened and is nowhere near happening.

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Why would a coalition pass the WA when they don't agree with it just for the sake of moving on? That makes no sense.

they won't, which is why "Get Brexit Done" seems to be working for the conservatives at the moment.

IAmTheReign

Aegir wrote: »

Even then it isn't a given.

I totally agree, but if the only people who will realistically support it are the Torys, and even then not necessarily all of them, why do you think the sensible thing is to sign it?

Bannasidhe

Aegir wrote: »

Even then it isn't a given.




i didn't though. I was trying to explain how Labour's plans would affect the price of groceries and are therefore just pie in the sky stuff. You added the bit about efficiencies helping make them less costly.

Well, if the price of groceries is the primary concern what effect do you think tariffs will have?

Green beans from Spain?
Cheese from France?
Beef from Ireland?

ArmaniJeanss

Opinium.
Polling period would include Hancock-gate.

CON: 45% (-1)
LAB: 33% (+2)
LDEM: 12% (-1)

12 points looks too big to bridge. Opinium have consistently been the largest gap, as high as 19 points 3 weeks ago.
The 7 point swing is at least some sort of positive for Labour.

Zubeneschamali

Aegir wrote: »

Will it? the UK could negotiate a trade deal with the EU, the US etc that makes things a lot better.

No, they really couldn't. Brexit means putting up barriers with Europe, the UKs biggest trade partner. There is no way for that to make things better.

This is not some ivory tower complicated theory that anyone doubts. Barriers to trade means less trade, it is super simple.

And there is also no way for US trade to jump by enough to offset the losses, even if the UK was fine with dropping food standards and jacking up pharma costs to get such a deal.

Zubeneschamali

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

12 points looks too big to bridge. Opinium have consistently been the largest gap, as high as 19 points 3 weeks ago.

This suggests that Opinum has been wrong all along, underestimating Labour, and that they still are.

IAmTheReign

Aegir wrote: »

Will it? the UK could negotiate a trade deal with the EU, the US etc that makes things a lot better.

No one can say with 100% conviction what Brexit means, because it hasn't happened and is nowhere near happening.

Obviously no one can predict the future but the simple fact is there is absolutely nothing to support the idea that the UK will negotiate trade deals better than what they already enjoy with EU.

On the other hand there is ample evidence that, despite not having happened yet, Brexit has already been economically damaging to the UK. I posted this in the Brexit thread when a certain pro Brexit poster made the claim that the UK economy was performing 'exceptionally well' and I got no response.

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Can you provide anything to support the claim that the UK economy is doing exceptionally well? Because everything I've seen would disagree with that statement.

Approximately 1 trillion dollars worth of assets have already been moved out of the UK banking sector and into the EU. That's 10% of the entire UK banking sector. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/07/investing/brexit-banks-moving-assets/index.html

Jobs created by inward investment has fallen 19% since the Brexit vote. Foreign capital investment has fallen by 30%. https://www.ft.com/content/bdc9f940-bb92-11e9-b350-db00d509634e

Claims by Brexiteers that devaluation of Sterling would be good for the economy proved (unsurprisingly) incorrect. "Higher import prices squeezed real incomes and a rise in exports was shortlived" "In the two years since Article 50 was triggered, real incomes of those below retirement age fell at the fastest rate ever outside of a recession" https://www.ft.com/content/9d4265b4-a949-11e9-b6ee-3cdf3174eb89

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

so why bother having a referendum if it fixes nothing?

Get the WA agreed and move to negotiations on a trade deal so Parliament can get on with doing the job it is supposed to, which is running the country.

It averts disaster, that's why.

The trade deal will take years to negotiate. We'll be hearing about this for years to come during which the Remain side will be launching a dogged Rejoin campaign. Pushing the WA through surrenders control to Brussels and starts Brexit. That's all.

Strazdas

IAmTheReign wrote: »

The only way the current WA is going to get approved is if the Torys get an overall majority.

Correct : Brexit is 100% a Tory project. Corbyn, Sturgeon and Swinson have never said a word about 'getting Brexit done'. If the Tories lose power, Brexit is effectively finished.