Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

[Andy_Ross]

Sure. But an independent Scotland could impound the bulk of the RN.

Which ' bulk' would that be?

How do you want impound a warship without a navy?

 

[Vixen]

Hm, this is interesting:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...f-no-deal-brexit-are-a-million-to-one-against

“It is absolutely vital that we prepare for a no-deal Brexit if we are going to get a deal,” he said. “But I don’t think that is where we are going to end up – I think it is a million-to-one against – but it is vital that we prepare.”

He said there was a new feeling of “common sense breaking out” among MPs in favour of passing a deal, despite many of his Eurosceptic backers believing he is readying himself for a no deal Brexit.
-- BJ Baboon

It seems like BJ will try to pass the WA one more time. Maybe the 'plan' is to ask the EU for a few more concessions, fail, claim victory and pass the agreement, then blame the EU for demanding UK holds up the treaty it just ratified.

He can't be stupid enough to believe EU will really cave in to him this time around, can he?

McHrozni

I can just imagine BoJo at No.10 and Liz Truss (Heaven help us) next door having to call the police in the early hours as he and Carrie have yet another row over his wanton recklessness and lack of care about anything. At least the sofa will be his, this time. Well, actually the cops will be standing right outside already.

 

[Vixen]

Seen in Thursday's HELSINGIN SANOMAT:

Helsinkiläisen taloyhtiön hitas-ero muistuttaa melkein brexitiä: Yhtiökokous päätti asiasta yli vuosi sitten, hallitus ei tee mitään

Brexit has now entered the Finnish language to mean something that takes an inordinately long time to happen, whilst insulting Brits - a nation Finns used to respect for giving it the Beatles.

Google translate

The difference in the price of a Helsinki-based housing company is almost like a brexit: The Annual General Meeting decided more than a year ago, the government does nothing

Another example of how it has crept into our beautiful language is whilst waiting in Turku at a bus stop just prior to the EU elections, a bus whizzed by in the opposite direction with a slogan emblazoned along the side featuring an election candidate: 'We won't Brexit, we'll Fixit'.

(So maybe it was the Perussuomalaiset.)

 

[Hungry81]

I think the term here is not "find out", but "accept". You're right that a very large proportion of Brexiteers will never accept they were fooled and led the country into disaster.

Enough will however, they will recognize the loony right is insane and work against them. With any luck they will band together to keep the idiot Brexitards away from anything useful for the foreseeable future. I can tell you this would've happened already, if you had proportionally elected parliament. With direct representation and FPTP you need a tad of luck too. A trainwreck no deal Brexit will help a lot, it will kill the very idea of Brexit. It won't be worth the price and I strongly recommend doing something, anything else, but even the worst-case scenario sees BJ, Nigel and their ilk losing.

They just take everyone else down with them. Joy.

McHrozni

yes its already too late with no satisfaction for anyone when or if they get to the point where the look into the mirror and think **** I was wrong.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Samson]

Ladbrokes with new quotes

Another UK EU Referendum before end 2020
2/1
UK to REVOKE Article 50 in 2019
2/1
UK to leave EU with no Brexit Deal before Nov 1st
3/1
Another UK EU Referendum before end 2019
8/1

 

[3point14]

Ladbrokes with new quotes

Another UK EU Referendum before end 2020
2/1
UK to REVOKE Article 50 in 2019
2/1
UK to leave EU with no Brexit Deal before Nov 1st
3/1
Another UK EU Referendum before end 2019
8/1

Bookies - the only political forecasters with actual money on the table.

 

[The Don]

Bookies - the only political forecasters with actual money on the table.

But they don't have any subject matter knowledge, they merely reflect how the punters have placed their bets.

If England are odds on to win a cricket match, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are the better team and are therefore more likely to win, just that more money has been placed on England than the other team. If those bets are driven by pro-England emotion and not reason then England may indeed be less likely to win.

Just because Ladbrokes punters think that the most likely outcomes are a 2019 revocation of Article 50 or a 2020 referendum doesn't necessarily mean that this is the case.

 

[uke2se]

But they don't have any subject matter knowledge, they merely reflect how the punters have placed their bets.

If England are odds on to win a cricket match, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are the better team and are therefore more likely to win, just that more money has been placed on England than the other team. If those bets are driven by pro-England emotion and not reason then England may indeed be less likely to win.

Just because Ladbrokes punters think that the most likely outcomes are a 2019 revocation of Article 50 or a 2020 referendum doesn't necessarily mean that this is the case.

One can only hope.

 

[3point14]

But they don't have any subject matter knowledge, they merely reflect how the punters have placed their bets.

If England are odds on to win a cricket match, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are the better team and are therefore more likely to win, just that more money has been placed on England than the other team. If those bets are driven by pro-England emotion and not reason then England may indeed be less likely to win.

Just because Ladbrokes punters think that the most likely outcomes are a 2019 revocation of Article 50 or a 2020 referendum doesn't necessarily mean that this is the case.

Well yes. None of that actually obviates my point.

 

[The Don]

Well yes. None of that actually obviates my point.

In which case we have, in effect, an opinion poll from a subset of society (Ladbroke customers - who, if their shop-based clientele are anything to go by, are predominantly older males) on a subject where the public currently have no sway.

 

[Information Analyst]

Sure. But an independent Scotland could impound the bulk of the RN.

How would Scotland manage that when the bulk of the Royal Navy is not in Scotland, and that which is in Scotland is - obviously - armed?

 

[Francesca R]

In which case we have, in effect, an opinion poll from a subset of society (Ladbroke customers - who, if their shop-based clientele are anything to go by, are predominantly older males) on a subject where the public currently have no sway.

It is not the same as an opinion poll because of the trading of money. That's why if someone predicts something and another says "Wanna bet on it?" it introduces a different consideration, and putting one's money where one's mouth is does not have the same consequences as merely opening one's mouth. Ladbrokes and other bookmakers also have online trade it isn't necessary to go into a betting shop, which may be a social occasion for a certain strata of punter (no idea really)

That said there is bound to be some betting with emotion (rather than analysis) even if money is involved. Bookies can get stuff wrong just as polls can (the traded odds also said "remain" in 2016 for instance, but by a smaller margin than polls). So they are not unbiased estimators but there are grounds to expect them to outperform opinion polls.

 

[Samson]

In which case we have, in effect, an opinion poll from a subset of society (Ladbroke customers - who, if their shop-based clientele are anything to go by, are predominantly older males) on a subject where the public currently have no sway.

The corollary is there is very easy money in that book where the spread is a trivial matter.
I think you are, surprisingly, misstating the purpose of a betting shop, which is to never lose money.

 

[Darat]

Any firm that leaves are traitors that simply don't deserve to do business in the sunny uplands of a post Brexit Britain

They'll come back once they realise what an opportunity they are missing, or at least the CEOs will be back, buying up Lake Windermere for a weekend retreat.

 

[Vixen]

But they don't have any subject matter knowledge, they merely reflect how the punters have placed their bets.

If England are odds on to win a cricket match, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are the better team and are therefore more likely to win, just that more money has been placed on England than the other team. If those bets are driven by pro-England emotion and not reason then England may indeed be less likely to win.

Just because Ladbrokes punters think that the most likely outcomes are a 2019 revocation of Article 50 or a 2020 referendum doesn't necessarily mean that this is the case.

Surely that is the whole point of betting, which is really, just probability theory in action. The salient feature of a forecast - or even of the future - is that it is uncertain and all the bookies are doing is trying to bring into view what is cerrtain - or near certain, as the only certain things in life are death and taxes - and calculate how relatively unlikely such and such a scenario is likely to happen.

With the Royal birth only one or two people got the name Archie right but with economic and political trends the possible outcomes are much narrower and can be predicted to a certain extent by assessing what has happened in the past and near past. So if the same horse has won the Derby for the last two years, punters will be betting it'll win for a third and often times as not their hunch turns out to be correct.

With Brexit there only seems to be the following options:

1. Accept deal as negotiated by May (= unlikely as no majority in Parliament three times and withdrawn a fourth)

2. Referendum 'People's Vote' (can it get a majority in parliament? Could be the way out of the impasse)

3. Boris/Jeremy to renegotiate = extension for another year (EU says no)

4. Leave with no deal (how likely will Parliament allow this?)

5. Revoke Article 50 and try again in the future (the electorate won't like this)

ISTM nos 2 and 5 are the only real options.

But as I say, the future hides its face.

 

[Darat]

Throw in a hint of wisdom of crowds as well.

 

[Nessie]

... Scotland having their own independent sea police force ....

You make that sound like a nautical Hamish Macbeth.

https://www.scotland.police.uk/whats-happening/featured-articles/dive-and-marine-unit-q-and-a

- Hi, Karen, and thanks for having us. So how does one get started with the Dive and Marine Unit?

- To apply to the dive unit, there’s an application process and assessment, beginning with basic swimming tests, doing around ten lengths of a pool.

 

[Nessie]

How would Scotland manage that when the bulk of the Royal Navy is not in Scotland, and that which is in Scotland is - obviously - armed?

Scotland has the biggest weapons stored in a cave at Faslane.

 

[Francesca R]

ISTM nos 2 and 5 are the only real options.

I wish.

 

[catsmate]

But they don't have any subject matter knowledge, they merely reflect how the punters have placed their bets.

True, I've taken quite a lot of money off them on political bets.