Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I've probably said this before, but it's remarkable how little is discussed on the subject of what would have happened if Britain voted to Remain. In my humble opinion the following would have happened:
1. Cameron and Osborne would have been completely vindicated and buoyed by the result. Result? Full steam ahead with austerity being turbo-charged.
2. EU's reaction? Britain, you've had two referendums on Europe, you've said yes both times, now shut the feth up and take a double dose of concentrated integration.
How would the country be better off with that result? The problems would still be there.
Do you think it'd be worse than this?
I think a clear Remain win (or any clear result) would have been a lot better. A Remain win would have hopefully shut up the backbench rebellion and marginalised some of the frothers a bit further.
On point 2, we wouldn't be able to negotiate any further special deals, but we have lots already. We'd still resist anything we felt was expansionism or integration.
Plus we wouldn't have wasted a year already getting pretty much gak all done.
4 more years of that smug git Cameron would have seen this country run into the ground. With Osborne, we'd have austerity coming out of our rears. People forget that even when we were in the EU, we had recession, so this talk of Brexit upsetting the economy is a nonsense IMO. At least Brexit forces us to actually do something about it.
I've made my position clear on numerous occasions: Brexit is not the problem, it's the Conservative party who couldn't organise a funeral in a graveyard that is the problem.
I was calling for A50 to be activated on June 24th, because I know that nothing focuses the mind more than the job in hand. Sadly, as you point out, we've wasted a year and it's added up to the square root of feth all.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
I've probably said this before, but it's remarkable how little is discussed on the subject of what would have happened if Britain voted to Remain. In my humble opinion the following would have happened:
1. Cameron and Osborne would have been completely vindicated and buoyed by the result. Result? Full steam ahead with austerity being turbo-charged.
2. EU's reaction? Britain, you've had two referendums on Europe, you've said yes both times, now shut the feth up and take a double dose of concentrated integration.
How would the country be better off with that result? The problems would still be there.
Do you think it'd be worse than this?
I think a clear Remain win (or any clear result) would have been a lot better. A Remain win would have hopefully shut up the backbench rebellion and marginalised some of the frothers a bit further.
On point 2, we wouldn't be able to negotiate any further special deals, but we have lots already. We'd still resist anything we felt was expansionism or integration.
Plus we wouldn't have wasted a year already getting pretty much gak all done.
4 more years of that smug git Cameron would have seen this country run into the ground. With Osborne, we'd have austerity coming out of our rears. People forget that even when we were in the EU, we had recession, so this talk of Brexit upsetting the economy is a nonsense IMO. At least Brexit forces us to actually do something about it.
I've made my position clear on numerous occasions: Brexit is not the problem, it's the Conservative party who couldn't organise a funeral in a graveyard that is the problem.
I was calling for A50 to be activated on June 24th, because I know that nothing focuses the mind more than the job in hand. Sadly, as you point out, we've wasted a year and it's added up to the square root of feth all.
You're forgetting several achievements. The £ has lost more than 10%, three quarters of the major economic indicators are now heading downwards, 96% fewer EU nurses are applying to come here, huge uncertainty in every industry from agriculture to nuclear reactors, the list is endless.
The efforts to overturn the result didn't help matters either. Cameron bailing despite pledging to enact the result of the referendum, there being no plan in the event of a leave vote because he was that arrogant he just assumed he'd win, Gina Miller trying to use her money and influence to get her way (so glad that backfired on her). Threats of s second Scottish indie ref. There's been too many distractions. This will be hard enough without all that noise.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 10:48:39
I've probably said this before, but it's remarkable how little is discussed on the subject of what would have happened if Britain voted to Remain. In my humble opinion the following would have happened:
1. Cameron and Osborne would have been completely vindicated and buoyed by the result. Result? Full steam ahead with austerity being turbo-charged.
2. EU's reaction? Britain, you've had two referendums on Europe, you've said yes both times, now shut the feth up and take a double dose of concentrated integration.
How would the country be better off with that result? The problems would still be there.
Do you think it'd be worse than this?
I think a clear Remain win (or any clear result) would have been a lot better. A Remain win would have hopefully shut up the backbench rebellion and marginalised some of the frothers a bit further.
On point 2, we wouldn't be able to negotiate any further special deals, but we have lots already. We'd still resist anything we felt was expansionism or integration.
Plus we wouldn't have wasted a year already getting pretty much gak all done.
4 more years of that smug git Cameron would have seen this country run into the ground. With Osborne, we'd have austerity coming out of our rears. People forget that even when we were in the EU, we had recession, so this talk of Brexit upsetting the economy is a nonsense IMO. At least Brexit forces us to actually do something about it.
I've made my position clear on numerous occasions: Brexit is not the problem, it's the Conservative party who couldn't organise a funeral in a graveyard that is the problem.
I was calling for A50 to be activated on June 24th, because I know that nothing focuses the mind more than the job in hand. Sadly, as you point out, we've wasted a year and it's added up to the square root of feth all.
You're forgetting several achievements. The £ has lost more than 10%, three quarters of the major economic indicators are now heading downwards, 96% fewer EU nurses are applying to come here, huge uncertainty in every industry from agriculture to nuclear reactors, the list is endless.
The CBI is reporting that this is a golden age for our exporters, with order books being filled on a level not seen in 30+ years. If memory serves, the CBI supported Remain, so I trust them on this.
The number of EU nurse applications falling seems to coincide with tough new English language tests being introduced for overseas nurses...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Future War Cultist wrote: The efforts to overturn the result didn't help matters either. Cameron bailing despite pledging to enact the result of the referendum, there being no plan in the event of a leave vote because he was that arrogant he just assumed he'd win, Gina Miller trying to use her money and influence to get her way (so glad that backfired on her). Threats of s second Scottish indie ref. There's been too many distractions. This will be hard enough without all that noise.
David Cameron will go down in history as one of the worst Prime Ministers this nation ever suffered. To abandon ship at the height of the biggest constitutional crisis since the 1930s tells you all you need to know about Cameron.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 10:56:41
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
I've probably said this before, but it's remarkable how little is discussed on the subject of what would have happened if Britain voted to Remain. In my humble opinion the following would have happened:
1. Cameron and Osborne would have been completely vindicated and buoyed by the result. Result? Full steam ahead with austerity being turbo-charged.
2. EU's reaction? Britain, you've had two referendums on Europe, you've said yes both times, now shut the feth up and take a double dose of concentrated integration.
How would the country be better off with that result? The problems would still be there.
Do you think it'd be worse than this?
I think a clear Remain win (or any clear result) would have been a lot better. A Remain win would have hopefully shut up the backbench rebellion and marginalised some of the frothers a bit further.
On point 2, we wouldn't be able to negotiate any further special deals, but we have lots already. We'd still resist anything we felt was expansionism or integration.
Plus we wouldn't have wasted a year already getting pretty much gak all done.
4 more years of that smug git Cameron would have seen this country run into the ground. With Osborne, we'd have austerity coming out of our rears. People forget that even when we were in the EU, we had recession, so this talk of Brexit upsetting the economy is a nonsense IMO. At least Brexit forces us to actually do something about it.
I've made my position clear on numerous occasions: Brexit is not the problem, it's the Conservative party who couldn't organise a funeral in a graveyard that is the problem.
I was calling for A50 to be activated on June 24th, because I know that nothing focuses the mind more than the job in hand. Sadly, as you point out, we've wasted a year and it's added up to the square root of feth all.
You're forgetting several achievements. The £ has lost more than 10%, three quarters of the major economic indicators are now heading downwards, 96% fewer EU nurses are applying to come here, huge uncertainty in every industry from agriculture to nuclear reactors, the list is endless.
The CBI is reporting that this is a golden age for our exporters, with order books being filled on a level not seen in 30+ years. If memory serves, the CBI supported Remain, so I trust them on this.
The number of EU nurse applications falling seems to coincide with tough new English language tests being introduced for overseas nurses...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Future War Cultist wrote: The efforts to overturn the result didn't help matters either. Cameron bailing despite pledging to enact the result of the referendum, there being no plan in the event of a leave vote because he was that arrogant he just assumed he'd win, Gina Miller trying to use her money and influence to get her way (so glad that backfired on her). Threats of s second Scottish indie ref. There's been too many distractions. This will be hard enough without all that noise.
David Cameron will go down in history as one of the worst Prime Ministers this nation ever suffered. To abandon ship at the height of the biggest constitutional crisis since the 1930s tells you all you need to know about Cameron.
And so it should be...
A Nurse has to understand medical instructions etc.
To demand that you have a strong understanding of language should be done.
If you do not understand. People can die.
Its never been racist pr wrong to expect those working here to know enough English to peforn the job.
Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.
"May the odds be ever in your favour"
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.
FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Was there actually a problem with nurses not understanding English or is the tougher demands just pandering to people's fear of foreigners?
It's probably a combination of both.
However it seems fluency (which anyway could easily be provided while training for the job) is not the only issue.
NHS to fast-track UK nurses to combat record departures of EU staff
Graphite wrote: Horray! The Tory party have given the DUP a £1,000,000,000 bung to put the Tory party in power, paid for by everyone regardless of who they voted for!
Don't burn this batch of cash, Arlene!
There's still a legal challenge on that in the offing. Seems the fear is any agreement with the DUP would violate the Good Friday Agreement.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Graphite wrote: Horray! The Tory party have given the DUP a £1,000,000,000 bung to put the Tory party in power, paid for by everyone regardless of who they voted for!
Wow, some real nice democracy at work there. Is this even legal? It feels an awful lot like bribes (and hence corruption) to me.
If say, the socialdemocrats in Sweden where to pay the equivalent of 1 billion pounds (I assume it's the tax payers who pay for this in the end) to some of the minor parties in order to get their own majority, people would get fired left and right, and afew heads would probably roll as well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 14:05:02
Graphite wrote: Horray! The Tory party have given the DUP a £1,000,000,000 bung to put the Tory party in power, paid for by everyone regardless of who they voted for!
Wow, some real nice democracy at work there. Is this even legal? It feels an awful lot like bribes (and hence corruption) to me.
If say, the socialdemocrats in Sweden where to pay the equivalent of 1 billion pounds (I assume it's the tax payers who pay for this in the end) to some of the minor parties in order to get their own majority, people would get fired left and right, and afew heads would probably roll as well.
'Confidence and supply' is basically official bribes, so it's fine.
Gina Miller trying to use her money and influence to get her way (so glad that backfired on her).
She tried (and succeeded) to prevent government talking away your rights without the support of parliament, and consequently prevented an extremely serious precedent being set in a country with an unwritten, evolutionary constitution. This is a very, very good thing.
Other than garnering her reams of racist and sexist abuse and a wealth of threats of physical and sexual violence, neither of which you're glad about, I'm sure, how did it backfire?
Graphite wrote: Horray! The Tory party have given the DUP a £1,000,000,000 bung to put the Tory party in power, paid for by everyone regardless of who they voted for!
Don't burn this batch of cash, Arlene!
Presumably we'll see loads of people saying things along the lines of "They don't even know what they're voting for, they're only doing it because they've been promised free stuff" ....
.... no ?
Bet that nurse May spoke to about the "magic money tree" is feeling great now eh ?
Spoiler:
Damn it, looks like Labour have lost that key Viscountess vote.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/26 15:56:03
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Gina Miller trying to use her money and influence to get her way (so glad that backfired on her).
She tried (and succeeded) to prevent government talking away your rights without the support of parliament, and consequently prevented an extremely serious precedent being set in a country with an unwritten, evolutionary constitution. This is a very, very good thing.
Other than garnering her reams of racist and sexist abuse and a wealth of threats of physical and sexual violence, neither of which you're glad about, I'm sure, how did it backfire?
For half a day recently, the Express ran 'Gina Miller goes to prison for $800,000 fraud' on the front page of their website . Unsurprisingly it was a completely different person, from the US in fact. Illuminating as to just how much she needled Richard Desmond however. Surely that deserves some praise.
Because her only intention was to stop the result of the referendum. Parliament was believed to be overwhelmingly pro remain, and if it was put to a vote there was a chance they'd vote against triggering article 50. She probably believed they'd refuse to trigger it. But they didn't. Instead they voted to trigger it and thus made Brexit law. Her little scheme back fired on her.
Because her only intention was to stop the result of the referendum. Parliament was believed to be overwhelmingly pro remain, and if it was put to a vote there was a chance they'd vote against triggering article 50. She probably believed they'd refuse to trigger it. But they didn't. Instead they voted to trigger it and thus made Brexit law. Her little scheme back fired on her.
I can't agree and think this interpretation requires limited familiarity with the full context.
There was never any chance it would be voted against. No commentator nor elected politician thought it was at all likely. Hell, virtually the entire opposition were saying, in parliament, 'put it to the house and we'll vote it through' and then did exactly that. Plenty of leavers were also insisting it be put to the house because the precedent set otherwise would be very dangerous. The only people who thought it was a scheme to stop Brexit were knee-jerking Leavers and the tabloids (who never believed it, but have papers to sell to knee-jerking Leavers).
She was a staunch Remainer, and part of her motivation was no doubt being in a huff about losing and wanting to say feth you to those who were now initiating the Brexit legislation, but she wasn't trying to stop the process.
What she did was successful. She prevented government from being able to remove citizens' rights without the consent of parliament, with the bonus value of causing a headache for people she was grumpy with by stopping them getting their way and embarrassing them. Ergo, no backfiring.
Automatically Appended Next Post: One wonders why, if Barnett doesn't apply to DUP deal (which I think is true as I understand the formula), David Mundell was allowed to go out yesterday and insist that 'Any funding that goes to Northern Ireland, Barnett rules will ensure the appropriate funding comes to Scotland'.
The relentless shambles that is the current government is hilarious.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/06/26 17:31:55
If I was in a Conservative constituency I'd be writing to my local MP demanding they ask the government for more cash for my local area in return for their vote on all issues
or at the very least anything the MP personally disagrees with but will vote for when 'whipped' since cash for votes now seems to be an ok thing
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Was there actually a problem with nurses not understanding English or is the tougher demands just pandering to people's fear of foreigners?
It's probably a combination of both.
However it seems fluency (which anyway could easily be provided while training for the job) is not the only issue.
NHS to fast-track UK nurses to combat record departures of EU staff
This will continue until the deal on worker movements is finalised.
Another completely brain dead policy by the Tories now desperate to try and temporarily minimise damage from Brexit for at least a couple of years. This isn't going to solve the problem.
Since they dropped the nursing grants, there has been a reduction in nursing applicants by about 25% from UK nationals; one in nine posts are currently unfilled. Fast tracking new nurses through the system means less training and hands on experience. Hence the existing nurses now have to become the teachers. This places additional strains on the nursing staff as they have to do even more training of new recruits. This is before you consider that it is only a temporary stop gap in that for two years you might get an increase in UK nurses but applicants are likely to remain stable unless they reintroduce nursing grants and after the fast track effect feeds through you just get the same number again. All it does is mean that those on three/four years courses now get to complete earlier (and then leave for the EU/America/Australia if they have any sense).
As for the Tory bung to DUP it equates to about a 10% increase on their budget. I can see why Wales and Scotland are annoyed (I can see how this might affect negatively Scottish Tory chances of getting more seats next time and plays into SNPs hands of Westiminster only cares about whats in it for themselves). That money has got to come from somewhere. Good old Tories caring about how to keep their own power rather than the Country as a whole. Still I expect it to all come crashing down as the DUP start handing it out to all their supporters by waste millions on schemes like the RHI.
Kilkrazy wrote: There are several examples of multi-lateral free trade agreements. Undoubtedly they are more complex than purely bilateral agreements, and take longer to work out. However the benefits of a multi-lateral agreement by definition are more broadly spread. The logic of trade means that the wider the network, the greater the benefits.
Is there evidence that the EU free trade zone has been bad for any of its members? Is there evidence that the EU-South Korea trade agreement has been bad for South Korea or any particular EU nations?
Its not the free trade that is the problem, its the unfettered open door mass migration, forced political integration, EU meddling in domestic politics (Italy and Greece), EU bullying of eastern European member states and all the other baggage that comes with it.
If the EU free trade zone had no strings attached it'd be wonderful, but it does have strings attached and its disingenuous to pretend that these are separate issues.
Any why is open door mass migration a problem? We should be welcoming immigration as otherwise the services you rely on won't be there when you get older and start needing them. As for forced political integration that depends on your point of view. The idea of free trade in the block is that everyone works to the same rules so no one country has an easier time than any other and has any special arrangements. A farmer in Spain knows that a farmer in the UK can only use the same pesticides and isn't using DDT on its populace to get a quick buck. As for meddling that's just a perverse way of looking at things. If you stopped paying your rent/mortgage then the owner/bank will come calling to say you aren't upholding your side of the bargain. For those areas that stop complying with the EU legislation then yes the EU will come calling because otherwise the rules are different across the countries and that is not the aim of equal and fair treatment in those areas for all countries that are complying.
Free trade across the world without rules will only lead to one thing - little industry in this country. Dyson didn't want Brexit to grow the country he wanted to ship his manufacturing to india where it is cheaper and then he can import all the goods to this country at a fraction of the manufactuirng cost, but still sell it at the same price. Any basic manufactuirng will simply disappear. You might find some specialist engineering stays for a while, but with an aging retiring population and a larger younger population abroad they will eventually leave as well. And May's offer to migrants is just disgusting. You can stay if you want, but family are out, friends are out. Basically be our slaves and swear fealty or else we don't want you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 18:48:15
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Again, encouraging immigration to pay for an ever growing, aging population is not sustainable. How do you pay for the growing population today, in 20-30 years time? Even more migration again? At what point does it just collapse? Open door, mass migration is not needed, we need migration targeted into key services with shortages, not just throwing the doors open to cheap workers which primarily suits corporations to depress wages.
It's effectively a Ponzi scheme. What happens when those immigrants retire down the line and now they need looking after? You'll eventually hit a brick wall.
Kilkrazy wrote: The UK doesn't have open door mass migration anyway, so the point is moot.
248,000 net immigrants in 2016 alone begs to differ.
And now we're back to defining what the scary term "mass immigration" means, which means we get another one or two pages of sniping back and forth before the thread gets locked. Again.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Future War Cultist wrote: It's effectively a Ponzi scheme. What happens when those immigrants retire down the line and now they need looking after? You'll eventually hit a brick wall.
So which one is it going to be? Cut the NHS? Cut pensions? Raise taxes? A combination of all three?
Future War Cultist wrote: It's effectively a Ponzi scheme. What happens when those immigrants retire down the line and now they need looking after? You'll eventually hit a brick wall.
So which one is it going to be? Cut the NHS? Cut pensions? Raise taxes? A combination of all three?
Number three, directed at the right people. I said before how we can get corporation tax to work, so there's that for a start.
Another day, another shambles from the Tories as, once again, they put party before country and have to bribe the DUP to stay in power...
A shabby little deal from a once great party reduced to a laughing stock...
What's the £1 billion for? To buy firewood to heat those empty barns in Northern Ireland?
I'm going to put my hand on my heart and get a bit personal here. I know some people voted against Brexit and are worried about the future. I understand that, I respect that.
But as somebody who grew up during the 1980s and had family members suffer as a result of Tory policies, I am enjoying every fething minute of watching the death throes of the Conservative party. Every fething minute of the Tory party dying from death by a thousand cuts...
The Tories are going to rue the day they ever heard the word Brexit.
Long may this shoddy, shabby deal last.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Y'know, even as someone who thinks leaving the EU is a huge mistake for the UK, if it means you can reform your political system into a less dysfunctional one at least something good might come of it.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
5500 pts 
6500 pts 
7000 pts 
9000 pts 
13.000 pts 
