Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Tromking

phillw wrote: »

At the moment the government has been promising all sorts of things, so nobody wants to take a risk. Similar to why some businesses haven't moved their operations from the UK. Until it's clear what brexit is on the table I don't see anything major happening and nobody is going to blink. You can't assume that because they haven't blinked yet that they won't, it's all part of the game.

Neither side is rioting yet, because there is no clear indication whether it's required. At some point this will change.

Oh I see.
There’s been a clear shift in public opinion but the Government doesn’t want to risk moving from its current position of no SM, no CU and no ECJ involvement. Weird that.

phillw

mrginge wrote: »

First off it!!!8217;s a good kicking for all those poor students who thought JC was going to cancel their debt...

If you're going to use students and loans as an example, then Nick Clegg promising to stop student loans seems rather apt.

The no planned VAT rise, followed by a vat rise.

Are you seriously telling me that you've never heard that election pledges aren't iron clad guarantees?

Parliament has never passed a bill that made breaking election promises a crime. I don't know if anyone has ever sued for fraud, but it's pretty clear from the past that they aren't scared to over promise and under deliver.

mrginge

phillw wrote: »

If you're going to use students and loans as an example, then Nick Clegg promising to stop student loans seems rather apt.

The no planned VAT rise, followed by a vat rise.

Are you seriously telling me that you've never heard that election pledges aren't iron clad guarantees?

Parliament has never passed a bill that made breaking election promises a crime. I don't know if anyone has ever sued for fraud, but it's pretty clear from the past that they aren't scared to over promise and under deliver.

Nice sideways dodge there Phil. For the second post running in fact.
At least we can now say you have no comeback on
A. The EUs willingness or ability to reform.
B. JC being as untrustworthy as any other politician.

Theophile

setmefree2 wrote: »

According to Tony Blair Brexit is "an Historic mistake" - well I guess he knows I thing or two about historic mistakes

#IraqWar
#WarCrimes
#MadeMeARichGuy
#BloodMoney

If it's a historic mistake, which is debatable, it's a historic mistake our current PM and the whole Tory party wholeheartedly supported.

How Theresa May voted on Foreign Policy and Defence

Consistently voted for the Iraq war Show votes
5 votes for, 0 votes against, 1 absence, between 2002–2003

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10426/theresa_may/maidenhead/votes

mrginge

Theophile wrote: »

If it's a historic mistake, which is debatable, it's a historic mistake our current PM and the whole Tory party wholeheartedly supported.


https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10426/theresa_may/maidenhead/votes

Let’s also remember then that pretty much the whole Labour Party supported having a referendum on EU membership and also on triggering article 50 to leave the EU.

Thrugelmir

Theophile wrote: »

If it's a historic mistake, which is debatable, it's a historic mistake our current PM and the whole Tory party wholeheartedly supported.

The House was misled by TB. Who was well and truly duped by his US pals. What's not in dispute is that Saddam had to be removed from power.

Thrugelmir

mrginge wrote: »

B. JC being as untrustworthy as any other politician.

Corbyn has a very clear agenda and objectives. Time is against him though and he knows it. Hence the cynical ploys.

Rough_Justice

Donald Tusk is unusually quiet even on his Twit thingy following his meeting with Theresa May.
Meantime the government press release says not very much.

Perhaps tomorrow's speech by May will have real content but it's unusual for Tusk not to have at least a minor rant so something's in the air.
Those unhappy with Brexit will now no doubt rant on imagining what they want but tomorrow we will see what May has planned.

phillw

mrginge wrote: »

Nice sideways dodge there Phil. For the second post running in fact.
At least we can now say you have no comeback on

Stop the bullying, I have no obligation to post anything.

mrginge wrote: »

A. The EUs willingness or ability to reform.

Reform in terms of what? I think there is willingness for reform, but not for the things demanded by leavers as those are inhumane.

mrginge wrote: »

B. JC being as untrustworthy as any other politician.

I have no data on how trustworthy he is compared to other politicians. He's human & so we can assume he's not 100% trustworthy, I've never met anyone who is.

mrginge wrote: »

Let!!!8217;s also remember then that pretty much the whole Labour Party supported having a referendum on EU membership and also on triggering article 50 to leave the EU.

Did they? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/01/a-fifth-of-labour-mps-defy-three-line-whip-to-vote-against-article-50-bill Your definition of "pretty much the whole Labour Party" differs from mine.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Corbyn has a very clear agenda and objectives. Time is against him though and he knows it. Hence the cynical ploys.

If he was doing something you wanted then you'd hold him as a hero. So whatever.

cogito

ilovehouses wrote: »

The joint report shows there was agreement about all parties being committed to finding a solution, respecting the UK and EU borders, being mindful of the GFA etc etc.

There was no agreement as to the mechanism. The only agreement in that respect was the UK would make proposals so an agreement could be reached. This hasn't yet happened.

It's patently obvious that agreement on the border wasn't reached because, if so, Mrs May would simply point out the error and demand the agreed mechanism be correctly referenced.

May was hoping platitudes would pass for proposals and, of course, they haven't.

The EU commissioned their own report on how to resolve the Irish border problem and produced a solution broadly in line with the UK's proposals. Here it is:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

So why are they ignoring it unless they are simply trying to make mischief?