Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
Theresa May signs up to unitary patent, accepts supremacy of top EU court
Aka even bigger mess in making...
Aka even bigger mess in making...
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
- Status
Another example of 'having your cake and eating it too', a phrase whose meaning I don't think the current British leadership understands...
Either that, or Theresa is a Bremainer in disguise. I found this increasingly unlikely in the past few months, but actions like these are consistent with a closet Bremainer sabotaging the process from the inside.
I hope that's the case. We'll see.
McHrozni
It's more like incompetent fools thrashing about helplessly when confronted by truly intractable problems of their own making. There is no good solution to this. Was not Cameron very wise simply to run away and disappear - not merely from government, but from Parliament - as soon as he realised the situation that had been created by his own idiotic overconfidence?
Last edited:
I understand your point of view but think that May has been an out-out-outer all the time.
The Occam's razor explanation is that it is simply incompetence with the various factions of the Conservative government thrashing around like stoats in a sack. There's no consensus about what kind of Brexit they want (or I guess there are various levels of realism about what kind(s) of Brexit are left available - none of them over-palatable to a lot of ministers) and so individual ministers are taking individual actions or making individual statements which merely muddy the water.
The conspiracy theorist's viewpoint (and given the events of 2016 one which I tend to subscribe to) is that May is deliberately allowing a confusing mess to develop, not so she can Bremain but rather so she can swiftly cut through the whole Gordian Knot, have a hard Brexit on WTO terms, get our of the EEA and leave the Council of Europe (so she can get the death penalty back) and have the excuse that it was the only way to resolve the situation without years of uncertainty.
The years and decades of political, social and economic turmoil will then be viewed as an unfortunate but necessary consequence of her bold and incisive action.
I understand your point of view but think that May has been an out-out-outer all the time.
The Occam's razor explanation is that it is simply incompetence with the various factions of the Conservative government thrashing around like stoats in a sack. There's no consensus about what kind of Brexit they want (or I guess there are various levels of realism about what kind(s) of Brexit are left available - none of them over-palatable to a lot of ministers) and so individual ministers are taking individual actions or making individual statements which merely muddy the water.
The conspiracy theorist's viewpoint (and given the events of 2016 one which I tend to subscribe to) is that May is deliberately allowing a confusing mess to develop, not so she can Bremain but rather so she can swiftly cut through the whole Gordian Knot, have a hard Brexit on WTO terms, get our of the EEA and leave the Council of Europe (so she can get the death penalty back) and have the excuse that it was the only way to resolve the situation without years of uncertainty.
The years and decades of political, social and economic turmoil will then be viewed as an unfortunate but necessary consequence of her bold and incisive action.
Don't get me wrong, I agree your scenario is the more likely one.
It's not the only possibility however, and I'm holding out hope there is something at least resembling a coherent, intelligent plan behind the madness.If not, well, there's always hope that the government will collapse under the weight of it's own sheer incompetence. New elections mean one good shot at ending the self-destructive Brexit.
McHrozni
As I said that's indeed more likely, but at the same time it's not the only possibility.
McHrozni
It is ridiculous that concessions of that kind are made in the interest of religious practices. If Sikhs are not permitted to wear such headgear they likewise aren't obliged to work in professions where it is appropriate. At least in this case
Should an individual suffer injuries as a consequence of not wearing head protection, employers will be legally protected through the extension of limited liability.
Another piece of idiocy is the system of denominational state schools in Scotland. If churches want to inculcate children with their doctrines, they can find their own time and money to do it....May is deliberately allowing a confusing mess to develop, not so she can Bremain but rather so she can swiftly cut through the whole Gordian Knot, have a hard Brexit on WTO terms, get our of the EEA and leave the Council of Europe (so she can get the death penalty back) and have the excuse that it was the only way to resolve the situation without years of uncertainty.
The years and decades of political, social and economic turmoil will then be viewed as an unfortunate but necessary consequence of her bold and incisive action.
I think you're probably right (except the death penalty part). It's the only real option. Trying to negotiate with the EU is like attempting to wrestle a greased octopus. I've long said (and several times in this thread) that walking away from the EU talking shop is the only sensible course of action.
There is a government webpage with a 'good reasons for carrying a knife or weapon' section that says:
A kirpan is a sort of ceremonial dagger. There have been incidents where people have been attacked and injured by Sikhs using their kirpans: granted it's not many incidents as Sikhs seem to be mostly peaceful people - but these exclusions set a bad precedent for any other religious groups that wish to demand similar preferential treatment.
So wrestling with 20 odd is worse than wrestling with over a 100.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I suppose you're referring to trade negotiations? The problem with EU trade negotiations is that the EU is a group of countries - each country has its own priorities and they are often mutually exclusive. Any one of the countries can veto the trade deal so it ends up with the negotiations taking forever.
It would be much simpler and quicker to negotiate with each of the 20 countries in the group individually. Where several of those countries want the same things, the negotiations could be completed fairly quickly on the basis of, 'You can sign up to the same deal we already agreed with Germany' or whatever. Anyway, EU rules forbid this but we can get on with negotiating deals with countries that are not locked into some sort of group with arcane restrictive negotiation rules.
Tbh ceptimus has been very clear that out-out-out is what (s)he wants for Brexit and is therefore fully in favour of anything which pushes us that way. I may be speaking out of turn (ceptimus, please correct me if I'm wrong) but I think that ceptimus believes that the UK will handle brexit very well but if there is any turbulence then it will be well worth it to be free of the shackles of Brussels.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,211
I'm not so sure that the UK will handle it well. I think out-out-out is the best option and I hope the government will pursue that - there are still many powerful groups with vested interests that are doing their best to stop that happening.
Even if the government does go for out-out-out, I'm sure that the EU and probably other groups will want to punish us for not doing what they want, so I don't think it will be easy or pleasant.
If we do ultimately manage to extricate ourselves fully from the EU, I think that will be a probably be a good thing in the long run - but it may be a very long run - ten years or more. Unforeseen events along the way may make things better or worse - that is always the way things happen.
Even if the government does go for out-out-out, I'm sure that the EU and probably other groups will want to punish us for not doing what they want, so I don't think it will be easy or pleasant.
If we do ultimately manage to extricate ourselves fully from the EU, I think that will be a probably be a good thing in the long run - but it may be a very long run - ten years or more. Unforeseen events along the way may make things better or worse - that is always the way things happen.
I've played games on my phone that were more complex than this ... ten years ago.
I could be wrong, but I think you don't grasp the complexity and inherent difficulties encountered in trade negotiations. At all. This is probably necessary to think Brexit is a good idea.
McHrozni
Last edited:
I cannot get over the mindset that can view shafting an entire generation (and more) as worthwhile for something that might be better than we have now. That is happy to drive us off the cliff on the off chance that we discover how to fly before we hit the ground.
Utter madness.
And, I note, that the "it'll all be the foreigners fault" has been nicely keyed in there. Yes, if it's really bad it'll be because they were nasty to us and not because we were being complete ****wits.
Utter madness.
And, I note, that the "it'll all be the foreigners fault" has been nicely keyed in there. Yes, if it's really bad it'll be because they were nasty to us and not because we were being complete ****wits.
You could just as well say that it's worth shafting an entire generation (and more) by staying with the status quo when there are other possible choices that could result in better outcomes.
Any government - indeed any group or individual - has to make choices that will affect their future in unforeseen ways. All that you can do is decide what you think is likely to lead to the best outcome, then enact that choice and live with the consequences for better or worse.
History shows us that being risk averse to the point of changing nothing is ironically the riskiest strategy of all.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 37,113
The Dumb, the Desperate and the Deplorables. Trump supporters basically.
- Status