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.
Somehow I get the feeling we won't be getting rid of his smug face for a long time. The man's going to keep coming back as long as anyone will listen to him :(
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: At least he's not showing up on the news or Question Time with alarming regularity.
Give him some time. Wasn't he complaining a couple days ago that he was single and broke? That sounds like he'll end up on some reality show, strictly come dancing anyone?
.. seem to recall being told over and over again the exact opposite of this and how it was going to be all sunshine and effortless trade deals propelling us into some awesome future.
Inequality, air pollution, tax dodging, poverty: we can't afford the cost of putting these things right.
But Brexit? Damn the cost consequences.
elsewhere..
this would presumably be the overtime we can already do yeah ?
I seem to recall things like rights cropping up before..
hail to the new chief, remarkably like the old chief.
The working time directive as it stands in the UK is meaningless. At the moment it is set at 48h, which is a 10 hour working day 5 days (with the so generous 20 min break in the middle), which can also be averaged over a month, PLUS anyone can sign out of it, and whilst it’s not legal to force people to sign out of it I know several people who have either been given the form with their contact and basically told “sign the form or don’t bother returning your contract” or been told that there industry is not covered, both of which is nonsense and illegal, but who is able to say no to a company like that?
This is exactly why I want to remain in the EU. The government want to remove what little protections we have (after saying they would not). I hope that this makes a few people wake up and realise what leaving is going to do to the UK. How many lies have to be uncovered before people change their mind?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/18 14:50:16
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
The EU does have a lot of inneficiencies and pointless regulation that needs to be addressed.
The EU apparently makes travel around it much easier than in the past - although Not experienced it myself but it seems a good thing.
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
The EU does have a lot of inneficiencies and pointless regulation that needs to be addressed.
The EU apparently makes travel around it much easier than in the past - although Not experienced it myself but it seems a good thing.
Travelling round Europe is brilliant. No stopping at checkpoints within she gen, minimal stops outside it. Can travel anywhere in eu on a whim with no planning beyond train/plane tickets or fueling up car.
Snore....it would be helpful if you actually used paragraphs rather than just repeat the same thing line by line. So I'm going to pick up a few points that you are managing to make in half a page that most people could do in a few small paragraphs and I've got more interesting things to do than go through it line by line.
I'm not sure you understand what the term fascism actually means. For example you don't see the irony in calling people fascists while arguing that the result of a democratic vote should be over turned because it delivered the wrong result. You're probably best not using that term till you've looked it up in a dictionary. Besides, who said anything about applying military force to people we disagree with? I mentioned the carriers as an example of how we'll be better able to contribute effectively to future coalition operations against organisations like ISIS and the influence that brings with it.
Definition of fascism (Collins Dictionary):-
"Fascism is a set of right-wing political beliefs that includes strong control of society and the economy by the state, a powerful role for the armed forces, and the stopping of political opposition. "
You'd be amazed how much influence that buys, along with a willingness to apply military force (got some shiney new aircraft carriers now) and a history of sharing our language and culture with the world (re; having previously invaded most of the known world..."
"Odd that I would have to defend a horrendous toilet paper rag like the Mail, but in fairness they're branding them traitors and saboteurs because they're trying to overturn a vote, the result of which everyone agreed would be respected "
You do the maths....the point of a democracy is a result can be overturned, again and again if that is how people vote. All you are seeing is political opposition to overturning the result you want and that should be stopped at all costs. What I'm advocating is a continual process where the population gets to choose.
It only seems that way because you don't seem to have a clue about any of this. You don't see to understand the concept that as an economy grows in size it becomes progressively harder to sustain a certain percentage growth rate, because each year the raw figure in pounds and pence terms has risen. 2% growth for this year will be harder to achieve than 2% growth was last year, because the baseline figure you're measuring against is 2% bigger than it was last year. I pointed out our growth history vs the eurozone because you need to understand that we've ended up so far ahead of them that it becomes progressively harder for us to sustain that level of growth with each passing year. Spain finds it easy because until a few years ago they were in a serious recession, from which it is very easy to recover. Our government policy isn't helping. Also keep in mind that we've wound up most of our quantitative easing, while the EU central bank is still part way through the process.
I do not live in a wealthy area just for reference. The fact that sales are up by value, presuming they've been adjusted for the exchange rate, should be seen as a good sign.
No I get the point that the larger you grow can be more difficult to sustain growth (though in reality it is more likely down to untapped potential). But anyway it doesn't matter what the percentage is (I was using a simplistic maths example). If in any year the growth is half the other then overall there is still a cumulative impact (so rather than 2/1% per annum continuously then the next year it's 1.8% vs 0.9% and so on). Over each year the differential becomes larger than double than purely the growth figures would indicate. It's also questionable whether sales are up by value is a good sign whereas sales by volume are down. It takes more people to make two TVs than one for example (arbitrary example). Therefore less things bought means less people in work (although the business owners do get to rake in more profit).
Aside from being amused at the idea that you think France will act in any way other than what is in the interests of France, you're basically agreeing that that the UK will not lose its seat. So its influence on that stage will not be diminished in any shape or form.
Conveniently ignoring that we've lost the seat on the World Court. It's not like we are going to lose all influence overnight...unless Boris the Clown has his way anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Howard A Treesong wrote: I’m amazed the average wage in Scotland is £27,500, but it’s likely skewed by a few very high earners. I bet average wage would look quite a bit different if you excluded the top few percent of earners from your calculation, say base an average on the 95th percentile. That gives you a real impression of the spending power of the majority. I’m not on much more than that as a teacher on a London pay weighting. And people wonder why staff retention is so low in London schools when no one can afford a home.
Average is never really a good indicator when you have a large sample especially if their is a skewed distribution as you've noted, the median is better but a quick scan couldn't find the specifics I was looking for and it isn't worth boredom to go and find it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AndrewC wrote: So the BBC has decided to try and declare an Xmas truce asking people to say one thing good about the opposite position.
From my point of view I think that the EU as a trading block and common market was a laudable and admirable aim.
Anyone else?
Cheers
Andrew
End of the Tories?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/12/18 19:49:09
"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
BaronIveagh wrote:All I can say is if England built walls of stone like their walls of text, the entire island would be fortified to a degree that they'd never need fear foreign refugees, though trade might be a bit tricky.
Perhaps we can build your wall for you. The only question is who's paying for it, you or Mexico? I apologise for not being able to sit at the computer all day and respond to each post individually as it comes up. I basically have to sit down and do it all in bulk.
jouso wrote:The question is why. Has there been any fundamental change in the British economy that has caused it to lag behind other economies of similar makeup? (big, western countries with a developed service sector).
The main problem was the first two quarters of the year, when the GE was happening. Close run elections tend to affect business confidence because we don't know who will win and what kind of government/framework we'll end up with on the other side. There's normally a short period of lag following something like this (can be up to 12 months, but 6-9 is more common) as the results of the decision making unwind themselves.
r_squared wrote:TLDR If you're looking for examples of arguments designed to either bore the gak out of people, or completely fail to convince anyone of your arguments, you can do worse than copy this chap.
You've certainly chosen an apt name.
Economics is seldom an exciting subject fella. It's not meant to be. I'm also going to take an educated guess and suspect your view on Brexit had a slight hand in your view, which makes your next comment all the more ironic.
Someone needs to convince us that they are not all nutcase idealogues who want to see us crash out of our biggest trading deal, and provide a reasoned, and reasonable, alternative. If they did that, they'd probably be surprised at the support they'd receive.
At this point we have to ask, what's the point? The case has been made over and over again. We've had years of debate about it. I've gone back and forth with some people to try and explain some of the elements of the economics of it and you just brushed it off with one sentence. Perhaps if more people on your side of the fence were better prepared to actually listen and to think about the advantages, and agree to work towards them as some have (so called "ReLeavers"), then we might actually make more progress, rather than just dismissing everything related to Brexit and deciding that your sole course of action will be to try and prevent it happening. Your side lost the vote, the onus is on you to try and convince people why we should accept certain limitations on the possible, not the other way around.
Steve steveson wrote:Rather than just attacking us they need to give us some idea of there it is going...And so on. I am feeling that many still in the leave camp (or the loudest) only want to leave the EU for ideological reasons and have no good arguments.
That depends on what you class as "ideological" vs good arguments. As far as I can tell every argument put forth by someone on the Leave side gets brushed off as being ideological. Not wanting to end up in a European superstate for example might be considered a solid argument on the Leave side, but get brushed off by opponents as being ideological.
Herzlos wrote:I've largely given up trying to ask what I need to do to make it a success, or where any of the upsides come from.
You don't do anything at this stage. The government is still negotiating, so at this point you just wait like everyone else.
AndrewC wrote:So the BBC has decided to try and declare an Xmas truce asking people to say one thing good about the opposite position.
The underlying idea of a Europe wide, limited customs agreement with some regulatory harmony, especially if that's used to try and drive international standards towards a single unified standard, is a good principle. Making Visa arrangements much smoother between the countries is a good idea. There is much to be said for the benefits of single, unified processes across an entire area the size of the EU, where we all sign up to a given standard on something like medication and agree to recognise any drug that meets set standard. If the scope of the EU was scaled back dramatically I'd be more than happy to support it.
Herzlos wrote:Somehow I get the feeling we won't be getting rid of his smug face for a long time. The man's going to keep coming back as long as anyone will listen to him :(
Farage is already positioning himself for a return to politics, probably trying by trying to jump on the Westminster gravy train. One of the grand ironies of all this anti-brexit work is that it makes the return of Farage more likely and makes the return of UKIP more likely (voters flooded from them on mass to join Labour in many constituencies) which makes a coalition between the Tories and UKIP more likely, which in return makes a hard brexit more likely.
Steve steveson wrote:The working time directive as it stands in the UK is meaningless. At the moment it is set at 48h, which is a 10 hour working day 5 days (with the so generous 20 min break in the middle), which can also be averaged over a month, PLUS anyone can sign out of it, and whilst it’s not legal to force people to sign out of it I know several people who have either been given the form with their contact and basically told “sign the form or don’t bother returning your contract” or been told that there industry is not covered, both of which is nonsense and illegal, but who is able to say no to a company like that? This is exactly why I want to remain in the EU. The government want to remove what little protections we have (after saying they would not). I hope that this makes a few people wake up and realise what leaving is going to do to the UK. How many lies have to be uncovered before people change their mind?
So you're saying we should stay in the EU so we could remain protected by a piece of legislation that doesn't actually protect anyone? A piece of legislation that encapsulates the EU process by sounding good in theory but in reality being nothing more than a token gesture to working people, while making sure the cosy relationship between corporate bosses and top politicians doesn't get harmed.
Or, here's an alternative, we could leave the EU and now you can elect a left wing government that will do what the EU couldn't, that will give you the rights you seek, irrespective of what anyone else in the world thinks about it, remembering that this country created the welfare state and the NHS long before the EU was even a glint in some European leaders eyes. This to me actually represents one of the more tragic elements of the EU, in that it has somehow managed to dupe entire generations of people into thinking that it is the font of all that is good and right with the world. While everyone fawns over the European Convention on Human Rights, they forget that there was an international decleration of human rights that preceeded it, which was inspired in large part by the US bill of rights, which was itself inspired by the English bill of rights that dates back to 1689, which itself was basically just a codification of certain English common law principles such as the right of Habeus Corpus which goes back to 1305, and the principles of the Magna Carta from 1215.
Or put another way, the European legal system is about 800 years behind the UK one, but it is gradually catching up. Could add in here about womens suffrage beginning in the UK in 1918, while many of our European neighbours didn't get around to it till the 1930s/40s (though the Finns and Norwegians beat us to it), but then I don't want to upset the apple cart too much about the supposed legal benefits of being in the EU. It's also worth noting that unlike many of our neighbours we've not had a fascist government in power here in the UK. A lot of the European rules are not designed to protect us, they're designed to protect people living in countries with a very (very) shaky history when it comes to things like freedom of expression.
Whirlwind wrote:Snore....it would be helpful if you actually used paragraphs rather than just repeat the same thing line by line. So I'm going to pick up a few points that you are managing to make in half a page that most people could do in a few small paragraphs and I've got more interesting things to do than go through it line by line.
Careful there cowboy, don't want you falling off the bandwagon and hurting yourself. But in the spirit of cooperation and Christmas goodwill I'll do the rest of this in paragraphs and without quotes, which I always find is worse because the specific points get lost in a blob of text, but hey ho and away we go.
You brought up the the dictionary definition of Fascism, none of which apply to people on the leave side. You're basically just throwing that word out there because it sounds good and it makes you feel warm and fuzzy at the idea that the opposing side are somehow all connected with the likes of Mussolini and Hitler. I've already explained to you, though you opted to ignore it, that I mentioned things like the carriers in relation to fighting ISIS. Or do you consider the EU to be fascist because it has a formal military mission to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia? You higlighted my comment about our country's past when it comes to invading people, a slightly tongue in cheek reference to the fact that a great many nations legal systems are based on ours, they use English as their secondary language (a language which has become something of an international standard) and the nature of how widespread elements of our culture are, such as all the sporting events that we created at which the rest of the world now kicks the out of us at. Which is virtually all of them. We have incredibly strong ties with a massive number of countries around the world, some of whom we owe an informal debt that we can never truly repay, but who have stood by us in our darkest hours in the past. The UK is unbelivably influential, more than you seem to realise.
Economically, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and presume you meant the opposite of what you actually said, i.e. that it's actually harder for large economies to grown because they've exahuasted a lot of their untapped potential, whereas the smaller countries benefit from having more room to grow (UK unemployment rate is nearly half that of the EU). I do find it odd though that you think sales being up by value is a bad thing? It looks decidedly like you're still just trying to find the bad in anything, whether real or perceived, which rather hints that you'd decided in your head that the economy is doing badly and you're working backwards from there, an approach that is always going to get you into trouble. You mentioned the world court, by which I presume you mean the International Court of Justice? In which case my understanding is that we had the support of the rest of the security council but opted to withdraw our candidate to avoid tying the place up for years in legal wrangling. Not least because our candidate was the guy that approved the legal case for the Iraq war....
If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB
bouncingboredom wrote: You brought up the the dictionary definition of Fascism, none of which apply to people on the leave side.
Nope didn't say that at all. There are plenty of people on here that support Leave that wouldn't come anywhere near a view that is close to fascism. I am saying your views are very close to supporting fascism even if doesn't seem to be registering.
I again point out your previous quotes and the definition:-
Definition of fascism (Collins Dictionary):-
Fascism is a set of right-wing political beliefs that includes strong control of society and the economy by the state, a powerful role for the armed forces, and the stopping of political opposition. "
You'd be amazed how much influence that buys, along with a willingness to apply military force (got some shiney new aircraft carriers now) and a history of sharing our language and culture with the world (re; having previously invaded most of the known world..."
"Odd that I would have to defend a horrendous toilet paper rag like the Mail, but in fairness they're branding them traitors and saboteurs because they're trying to overturn a vote, the result of which everyone agreed would be respected
If you can't see it (or don't want to) look again and look *harder* and question what you yourself are saying.
Economically, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and presume you meant the opposite of what you actually said, i.e. that it's actually harder for large economies to grown because they've exahuasted a lot of their untapped potential
Erm China says hello. What second biggest economy and consistently high growth. Of course it does help that it has huge resources in both land and people.
You mentioned the world court, by which I presume you mean the International Court of Justice? In which case my understanding is that we had the support of the rest of the security council but opted to withdraw our candidate to avoid tying the place up for years in legal wrangling.
This is just plain denial now. How can you possibly that losing a position on the International Court is not a loss of prestige. You keep on claiming the UK is powerful and influential yet doesn't seem to be able to influence, well, much at all.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/18 22:34:58
"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
bouncingboredom wrote: ... Your side lost the vote, the onus is on you to try and convince people why we should accept certain limitations on the possible, not the other way around...
Really, the onus is on me to convince you that a hard Brexit is a bad idea and that we should limit that? If you can't see that yourself, then there's nothing much I can say that will convince you otherwise.
My complaint is the lack of plan and leadership on the side that have lead us down this path. All the most prominent Leavers pretty much abdicated their responsibility the second they could, with only a talentless handful left at the helm. Realising that it was a fething stupid idea to begin with, they've been more than happy to let a bunch of bumbling clots and half-hearted Remainers run the show, because they can sit back and blame everyone else for the gak storm.
At the moment Leave lacks a plan, leadership and integrity, and have left it to those who didn't want this to pick up the pieces, and have the audacity to blame us for not convincing Leave to not feth the whole economy into the ground. Exactly as you just tried to do then.
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
jouso wrote:The question is why. Has there been any fundamental change in the British economy that has caused it to lag behind other economies of similar makeup? (big, western countries with a developed service sector).
The main problem was the first two quarters of the year, when the GE was happening. Close run elections tend to affect business confidence because we don't know who will win and what kind of government/framework we'll end up with on the other side. There's normally a short period of lag following something like this (can be up to 12 months, but 6-9 is more common) as the results of the decision making unwind themselves.
Whirlwind wrote:I am saying your views are very close to supporting fascism even if doesn't seem to be registering.
So let me get this straight, you think I'm a fascist because - as was established much earlier in the thread - I opposes strong state intervention in society and especially oppose state intervention in the economy, I mentioned that our armed forces have in the past been willing to join in international operations such as those against ISIS (a genocidal religious group). in the Balkans (to bring a genocide to an end), Libya (where the government was about to slaughter its own people with tanks) and the first Iraq war (where we helped liberate Kuwait from an illegal occupation), and because I would like to see parliament enact the result of a democratic vote?
Yeah, right old fascist I am. Can't stop, I need to grab my copy of mein kampf, slip some jack boots on and goose step my way down to the nearest Britain First rally. In the meantime I would suggest you reflect on just how utterly pants on head barmy your position has become and what it says about the quality of your arguments that you've now resorted to just chucking the word fascist at people that you disagree with.
r_squared wrote:Really, the onus is on me to convince you that a hard Brexit is a bad idea and that we should limit that? If you can't see that yourself, then there's nothing much I can say that will convince you otherwise.
My complaint is the lack of plan and leadership on the side that have lead us down this path. All the most prominent Leavers pretty much abdicated their responsibility the second they could, with only a talentless handful left at the helm. Realising that it was a fething stupid idea to begin with, they've been more than happy to let a bunch of bumbling clots and half-hearted Remainers run the show, because they can sit back and blame everyone else for the gak storm.
At the moment Leave lacks a plan, leadership and integrity, and have left it to those who didn't want this to pick up the pieces, and have the audacity to blame us for not convincing Leave to not feth the whole economy into the ground. Exactly as you just tried to do then.
A bunch of the leavers tried to run for the PM job but the remain heavy party opted to back a remain candidate for the leadership. I'm not sure what you expect leave voters to do about this? Said new PM is now in the process of trying to negotiate the best deal she can, at least when everyone isn't desperately trying to undermine her negotiating position. Or did you think the government was just going to appoint Nigel Farage or someone like that as its chief negotiator?
As for a hard brexit, it has its advantages and disadvantages. One thing I've learned from discussing the issue with remain sided individuals is that most of them don't really understand much about the economics of it in the slightest, only that they've read "hard = bad" somewhere and adopted that position, and that much of the fanfare around the intellectual superiority of remain voters over leave voters has proved decidedly lacking when actually put to the test on the matter e.g. the day after the vote when thousands of young people took to twitter to moan endlessly about the pound dropping in value and how it had ruined their futures, because they don't understand the first thing about currency movements or how a weaker pound could lead to the sort of results that were released yesterday when manufacturing businesses posted 30 year highs in their order books.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/19 07:22:15
If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB
Do you know something the World Bank, BoE, US Treasury, EcB, LSE and many other economists don’t? Or are you just picking one fact that suits your needs and dismissing all others whilst insulting the other side?
Of course you will get more manufacturing in the short time as exports go up, but a weak currency has all sorts of negative effects. Dismissing details like this and attacking anyone who disagrees (see the statements about being “done with experts) are the hallmarks of the leave campaign overall. I’m no economic expert, but I know other people here are, and almost certainly more of an expert than you, so I will let someone else point out the details of how you are wrong.
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Steve steveson wrote: Of course you will get more manufacturing in the short time as exports go up, but a weak currency has all sorts of negative effects. Dismissing details like this and attacking anyone who disagrees (see the statements about being “done with experts) are the hallmarks of the leave campaign overall. I’m no economic expert, but I know other people here are, and almost certainly more of an expert than you, so I will let someone else point out the details of how you are wrong.
Maybe he hasn't lived through period when that happens. Or maybe he's from rich family. Generally it's the poorer side who gets hurt by currency dropping in value. Rich ones can often by with less effect.
One of the effects of a weak pound driving export growth (and tourism) is that it leads to a strengthening of the pound, as foreign customers have to buy pounds to pay for their orders, and the increased demand for pounds tends to push up their value.
There is a way around this, to trade in USD or Euros, which is not unusual for big multi-national companies. Of course, it also means such companies get less benefit from the weakening of the pound in the first place, and if they want to return their profits to UK shareholders, they have to buy pounds in the end. But it can be useful to hedge in different currencies.
These sorts of transactions are greatly helped by the status of London as the major financial centre of Europe. Which, sadly, will fall away once passporting rights are lost due to Brexit, unless we stay in the EFTA.
The UK's new aircraft carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, is leaking because of a faulty seal.
The Royal Navy's future flagship, which was commissioned by the Queen earlier this month in Portsmouth, has a problem with one of its propeller shafts.
The fault on the £3.1bn carrier was first identified during sea trials.
A Royal Navy spokesman said the ship is scheduled for repair and the fault does not prevent it from sailing again early in the new year.
According to the Sun newspaper, HMS Queen Elizabeth has been taking on up to 200 litres of sea water every hour because of the fault.
BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Beale said the problem was "highly embarrassing" for the Royal Navy and was just one of a number of snags still to be rectified.
A Royal Navy spokesman said: "An issue with a shaft seal has been identified during HMS Queen Elizabeth's sea trials; this is scheduled for repair while she is alongside at Portsmouth.
"It does not prevent her from sailing again and her sea trials programme will not be affected."
The government want to remove what little protections we have (after saying they would not). I hope that this makes a few people wake up and realise what leaving is going to do to the UK. How many lies have to be uncovered before people change their mind?
May's answers are very telling :
Note how any of these laws we're going to keep can now, of course, be changed without the effort of going through parliament.
At the moment Leave lacks a plan, leadership and integrity, and have left it to those who didn't want this to pick up the pieces, and have the audacity to blame us for not convincing Leave to not feth the whole economy into the ground. Exactly as you just tried to do then.
exactly.
We were amongst the strongest and most influential members of the EU.
The most favoured Brexit "plan" was to negotiate individual trade deals with other EU countries, though it turned out EU members don’t make individual trade deals precisely because they are stronger as a bloc. https://twitter.com/DavidDavisMP/status/735770127564607489
who'd have known ? Apart from those on the Remain side of things of course.
One can't help but note that Davis lacked the ability to even thread that twitter stream correctly.
From there we moved onto simply saying "Brexit means Brexit" -- as if a fething slogan can actually make up for there not being a coherent policy tom operate.
So we quickly wound up pushing the next great lie :
Not long after this fiasco Disgraced Minister Liam Fox suddenly decided to start pushing the pro-hard brexit trading under WTO rules as being great -- which was a bit of a change from before
But remember apparently everyone who voted leave knew that we would be leaving the common market, despite all those people telling them we wouldn't be.
Thankfully the leave campaigners stepped up a gear to get us ready :
UK Foreign Secretary @BorisJohnson:
"Brexit means #Brexit and we're going to make a #Titanic success of it"
we're suddenly being told that having no deal at all will actually be really great for us.
A person with a memory might note that this is somewhat contradictory with all the preceding talk about deals but then you get called unpatriotic and/or a traitor as you don't believe in the project enough. or something.
Then there was that whole election thing ..
.. that went well eh ?
So instead of a strong Govt. with a clear mandate and majority we wound up with a weakened Govt, unable to sack ministers even when people from both sides of the Brexit debate/political spectrum agree that they're useless and/or incompetent -- or possibly making their own power play or so forth.
The irony being here that to prop up the Govt. they were forced to rely upon the support of a party who do not want a/the Hard Brexit that was the latest policy-de-jour
which has led us nicely into the recent delight that has been the Irish border issue.
Now it's quite fair and reasonable that Joe Public did not take that issue into account when they cast their vote. No one really thinks about every issue and even if they did people are always going to prioritise.
What isn't -- or shouldn't be -- acceptable is people lying about the issue and/or MPs and the like ignoring the issue. It was raised wwaayy before the election and..well...
Note that this issue now is being spun as some hideously fiendish ploy by the EU to snatch NI away from the UK
British officials have quietly abandoned hope of securing the government’s promised “cake and eat it” Brexit deal, increasingly accepting the inevitability of a painful trade-off between market access and political control when the UK leaves the EU.
From there we moved from not paying a penny and telling the EU to go whistle to agreeing that in fact we do have to pay some money over and will have to do that before we can start the talks that people like Disgraced Minister Liam Fox had said could be half over by now as they'd be so easy.
So we're currently left with having no influence over the EU rules, but we're going to follow them anyway as it's impractical to do so otherwise.
.. hooray ?
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,
My favourite moan from the Leavers remains 'The EU are playing hardball, no fair! Big bullies!'
Like we expected anything else? Because any international negotiation isn't all about both sides trying to take the upper hand and keep it.
I mean.....yeesh. That level of naivety as to how the world actually works, whether genuine or contrived naivety, that alone should trigger a second referendum.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
That aircraft carrier leak 'story' made me laugh when I saw it yesterday. Primarily because it was posted up in a forum full of RN personnel who were greatly entertained that their equivalent of office snagging was being portrayed as some sort of actual issue.
Ketara wrote: That aircraft carrier leak 'story' made me laugh when I saw it yesterday. Primarily because it was posted up in a forum full of RN personnel who were greatly entertained that their equivalent of office snagging was being portrayed as some sort of actual issue.
RedS8n's post was the first I'd seen of this and my reaction was the same as those RN you mention. Anybody who thinks this is a major problem, or that it is embarrassing, clearly has no knowledge on the subject of bringing large scale machinery into comission. Being military adds a whole extra bunch of problems on top. That boat's log book was probably riddled with accepted faults and limitations before it ever saw water. Some running in snags aren't just expected, they're factored into its servicing.
... err thanks.
out of us at. Which is virtually all of them. We have incredibly strong ties with a massive number of countries around the world, some of whom we owe an informal debt that we can never truly repay, but who have stood by us in our darkest hours in the past. The 
