Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[3point14]

In a wrecked economy it doesn't much matter.
Either way we'll all be worse off.

Yes, but that pain would be spread a little more evenly.

I don't believe that you believe that the results of a post brexit tory government will be the same a post brexit labour one. They just won't

I don't care if, under Corbyn, I get to eat a whole rat, rather than half of one under Johnson. I'll still be eating rat.

That's madness, Between half a rat and a rat, I'll take whole one. So would you. Either way you're eating rat. With a whole one, you won't be malnourished.

 

[Francesca R]

[Corbyn] should show leadership and allow another person to take the helm of such a government.

The others could also show leadership and tolerate Corbyn. It's as if they (i) don't believe that all he would do is delay brexit and call an election (which is odd since he "doesn't have the numbers" to do anything else), or (ii) they are scared he will be really popular in office (which is odd since polls indicate he is a lot less popular than Johnson)

 

[Francesca R]

Between half a rat and a rat, I'll take whole one. So would you.

Er, I think I would rather eat half a rat.

In other words I would "like" not eating the other rat half.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I really don't see a GNU hanging round for the length of time needed to put together a referendum.

It would require everybody (other than the Tories) working together. Everybody other than Jeremy Corbyn seems prepared to do so.

So yes, you're right. Without Corbyn, I think it would be possible, because most MPs seem to recognise this as the crisis that it is, and that a second referendum with a deal actually on the table is likely the only way out of it at all.

 

[3point14]

Er, I think I would rather eat half a rat.

In other words I would "like" not eating the other rat half.

The metaphor is becoming unreasonably stretched.


I don't think "It's gong to be bad so it may as well be as bad as it's possible to be" is reasonable. And yet it's what I'm being told.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Er, I think I would rather eat half a rat.

In other words I would "like" not eating the other rat half.

But if you had a whole rat, you'd have the choice of leaving the other half on the side of the plate.

Dave

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

No, but it's a lot of reasons he'd be a better PM than the current one.

Since I've already said that he'd be a better PM than Johnson, I don't know why you're directing that at me - especially not while admitting that what you posted in reply to me isn't actually a reply to me.

 

[3point14]

Since I've already said that he'd be a better PM than Johnson, I don't know why you're directing that at me - especially not while admitting that what you posted in reply to me isn't actually a reply to me.

No, it was mitigation of your point.

i.e. In spite of all you say, even if it's true, he's still not as bad as Boris. So why is he being painted as such?

 

[Francesca R]

And yet, for reasons I don't understand, apparently [Johnson and Corbyn are] as bad as each other.

In simple terms Johnson is too far right and Corbyn is too far left.

If you are left or right you will see that as meaning one is surely better than the other. Or you'll try to say that one of them is close the the centre than the other. But with respect to the latter relative to the political preferences of UK voters that's probably gonna be Johnson . . . .

 

[Francesca R]

I don't think "It's gong to be bad so it may as well be as bad as it's possible to be" is reasonable. And yet it's what I'm being told.

OK that's not how I read it (from Tolls) but I dunno.

 

[3point14]

In simple terms Johnson is too far right and Corbyn is too far left.

Which is madness and utterly dependent on the Overton Window.

(I also find that the whole left/right thing a useless and decisive thing. To attempt to define the whole of one's views on absolutely everything as a point in one dimension is madness. I, you, and everyone else are much more complex than that)

If you are left or right you will see that as meaning one is surely better than the other. Or you'll try to say that one of them is close the the centre than the other. But with respect to the latter relative to the political preferences of UK voters that's probably gonna be Johnson . . . .

The centre moves. To talk of one being too far in one direction or the other is pointless. I would prefer to look at policy proposals and check them against the real world rather than some constantly moving target of 'centrism'

 

[The Don]

But are saying they are as bad as each other. If we look at it as an equation the two sides are no where near the same. Corbyn is for public spending, Johnson against it, Corbyn is for workers rights, Johnson is against them, Corbyn (in your opinion) will delivery a no deal Brexit, Johnson will deliver (In my opinion) a no deal brexit.

So the no deal Brexit cancels it out and you are left with the rest of the stuff. The rest of the stuff to me on Corbyn's side (especially some of the recent policies enacted at conference) is much better for the country that what Johnson would allow us to have.

After a no-deal Brexit, none of the other stuff really matters.

Tory bribes spending plans go out of the window because we simply can no longer afford them.

Labour promises are equally unaffordable although I suppose there'll be a far greater range of failing industries for a Jeremy Corbyn led government to subsidise - it's a shame that they'll have no money left to do it.

Workers' rights are only a factor when there are people in employment, promises to increse public spending is all well and good but in an economy suffering from stagflation then simply maintaining expenditure in real terms is a challenge. We have the 1970s as an example of how such a situation is likely to play out.

 

[3point14]

After a no-deal Brexit, none of the other stuff really matters.

I think that's just not accurate.

The two would be very different. Neither would be good but I'm damn sure I know which one I prefer.


That you think they both will be the same is the point of disagreement between us. I think your position regarding that is just not logical. Of course they'll be different.

 

[The Don]

The Economist seems fairly correct that the country has the worst PM and the worst opposition leader at the same time. If Corbyn wanted "national unity" there would not be the insistence that he leads it.

However, much as I would prefer a Swinson led caretaker government (or even a Clarke one), I would rather have the Corbyn version than none.

Unfortunately it seems that Jeremy Corbyn's insistence that he's Prime Minister means that we're not going to get a GNU - which in a nutshell is my main reason why I think he would make a terrible Prime Minister, he finds any kind of compromise, deviation or dissent from his chosen path impossible.

 

[Francesca R]

Unfortunately it seems that Jeremy Corbyn's insistence that he's Prime Minister means that we're not going to get a GNU - which in a nutshell is my main reason why I think he would make a terrible Prime Minister, he finds any kind of compromise, deviation or dissent from his chosen path impossible.

Excluding brexit (which makes this rather irrelevant of course) I think I would prefer a Johnson government over a Corbyn one. On balance I suspect Corbyn is actually more opposed to no deal brexit than Johnson is which makes him better if all else was equal. But other Labour policies are IMO worse.

However the latter are not relevant to a Corbyn-led caretaker government that simply delays brexit and calls an election. He should not insist on leading it but by the same token the others should not rule out him leading it.

 

[3point14]

Excluding brexit (which makes this rather irrelevant of course) I think I would prefer a Johnson government over a Corbyn one. On balance I suspect Corbyn is actually more opposed to no deal brexit than Johnson is which makes him better if all else was equal. But other Labour policies are IMO worse.

Which ones?

However the latter are not relevant to a Corbyn-led caretaker government that simply delays brexit and calls an election. He should not insist on leading it but by the same token the others should not rule out him leading it.

 

[The Don]

I think that's just not accurate.

The two would be very different. Neither would be good but I'm damn sure I know which one I prefer.


That you think they both will be the same is the point of disagreement between us. I think your position regarding that is just not logical. Of course they'll be different.

Compared to the effects of Brexit, and especially a no-deal Brexit, everything else is a rounding error IMO.

In any case, after Brexit, and especially a no-deal Brexit, all plans goes out of the window because any government will have its hands merely firefighting the economy and attempting to maintain public order.

 

[3point14]

Compared to the effects of Brexit, and especially a no-deal Brexit, everything else is a rounding error IMO.

I really don't think so. I don't envisage the country being so on it's uppers that policy changes at parliamentary level have zero effect.

What you seem, to me, to be saying is that after a no deal brexit the government will have no significant or noticeable effect on the state of the country. I can't accept that, I think that's just not accurate.

In any case, after Brexit, and especially a no-deal Brexit, all plans goes out of the window because any government will have its hands merely firefighting the economy and attempting to maintain public order.

I don't accept that. I don't accept that who s in power will have zero effect on the lives of everyone.

 

[Worm]

UK Proposals for a new protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland :

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...for-a-new-protocol-on-irelandnorthern-ireland

 

[Tolls]

In simple terms Johnson is too far right and Corbyn is too far left.

Personally I don't think he's too far left (at least on most things). He's a bit unreconstructed 1970s in his views, but a lot of what came out of the Labour conference was fairly reasonable.

I just don't think he's particularly competent.

OK that's not how I read it (from Tolls) but I dunno.

I think you read it the way I intended.

I don't want to be eating rat at all.
So I'm not going to support someone who seems intent on having me eat rat. I don't actually care whether it's a whole one or not.

However...at least Corbyn is on the referendum route now, which is a massive plus point. However, however...I really don't trust him not to change his mind, or to throw his full weight behind Brexit in any campaign.