Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[GlennB]

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

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

As Nicola Sturgeon said a little while ago - 'designed to fail'. And predictably so.

 

[The Don]

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.

That's the way it felt in the 1970's.

If there's inflation and a stagnant or shrinking economy then any changes will be very marginal.

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.

After a no-deal Brexit any Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn led government would effectively be passengers - but for different reasons. Boris would be a willing passenger, after all it's what he wants. Jeremy may be an unwilling passenger but his inability to change from 1970s thinking and his unwillingness and/or inability to compromise in any meaningful way means that he'll still be a passenger.

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

I'm not saying that they'll have zero effect, just that the effect will have little or nothing to do with the campaign promises that they've made due to the economic and social turmoil.

As someone who is seemingly impervious to changing circumstances and incapable of compromise then Jeremy Corbyn doesn't seem like the kind of leader you'd want.

 

[The Don]

As Nicola Sturgeon said a little while ago - 'designed to fail'. And predictably so.

Yup

Would Nicola Sturgeon allow herself to be ennobled and installed as GNU in chief ?

 

[GlennB]

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

I'd say that's a major exaggeration. Things will be bad, but not so bad that the colour of the govt. will make no difference.

A 'rounding error' is where you express pi as 3.141 rather than 3.142

 

[Francesca R]

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 was thinking of writing that Johnson is not too far right, but incompetent, unfit for office, populist, opportunistic, self-serving etc. I don't really know enough of Corbyn to make those same conclusions, it is the far-leftness I disagree with.

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.

I think that the markets (which are interested in wealth not social justice or anything like that so it is not a judgment that should be recommended to voters) would prefer a Corbyn led temp government toppling Johnson's than this not happening. Probably they believe he would stop no deal and then get voted out. (I believe that as well--sure "trust" is a risk but on balance worth it)

 

[Francesca R]

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

Where are your predictions coming from?

I know everyone has "had enough of experts" but the IMF and the OECD think no deal is a -3% or -3.5% shock to economic output, and the Bank of England has moderated its previous -8% forecast to about -5.

(And the consensus among economy watchers / market types was too pessimistic in respect of the impact of a leave vote)

 

[psionl0]

I'm just talking about the part someone cited.

IOW you don't know which part nor who cited it.

 

[The Don]

Where are your predictions coming from?

My well-upholstered rear

 

[Francesca R]

Well some folks will clearly feel a much worse impact than that. Some others won't notice at all. A few might be better off.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I was thinking of writing that Johnson is not too far right, but incompetent, unfit for office, populist, opportunistic, self-serving etc.

Can you really make that argument given how divorced from reality Johnson is? I mean all this over Prawn Cocktail crisps? Does he really have policies instead of vague ideas that have no resemblance to reality?

 

[Francesca R]

Does that contradict my statement? Seems to be in line with it

 

[ponderingturtle]

Does that contradict my statement? Seems to be in line with it

But how can you say how far right someone is in a situation like that?

 

[Francesca R]

You can't which is the point really.

 

[Garrison]

Its ridiculous how Johnson is still trying to act like he's holding all the cards in negotiating with the EU even when everyone can see his hand is actually just pages torn from a notebook with the word 'ace' scrawled on them.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Yup

Would Nicola Sturgeon allow herself to be ennobled and installed as GNU in chief ?

Vote to dissolve the Union and then E W and NI can ask to form a new one with Scotland?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Regarding this temporary government nonsense its clear that the priority has to be preventing a no deal Brexit and Johnson cannot be trusted to do that.

Who leads the GNU is irrelevant in my mind. It probably should be Corbyn as thats the convention. And Swinson is an idiot child for insisting she won't back him.

Equally you would hope that if Corbyn couldn't get the numbers but someone else could then he would step aside but he is probably right not to say that at the moment.

None of the UK parties are coming out of this with much glory at the moment.

In the longer term, no matter what happens the problem doesnt go away. BoJo wins an election and forces no deal, Labour win an election and cant agree a deal that works and we end up in this limbo, or there is a hung parliament with the empty crisp packet Swinson blowing around trying to decide if she wants her rat fried or grilled.

Thank God Scotland, NI and Wales have an out if they want it, because this is going to kill England for a degeneration at least one way or another

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

No. I have been consistent throughout.

My question has always been "what existing law or precedent limits the advice the PM can give the Queen?" and the answers have always been of the form "the SC can limit the advice because the SC can" (duh!) and nobody can see that this doesn't answer the question.

Alternatively, what existing law said he could do what he did?

As we have tried to explain to you repeatedly that was the question put to the court. Does the existing law allow him to do this? and the answer came back, no it doesn't.

Thats the job of the SC to interpret and clarify the law.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

oh and apparently parliament is going to be prorogued again next week for a Queens speech

 

[Francesca R]

Equally you would hope that if Corbyn couldn't get the numbers but someone else could then he would step aside but he is probably right not to say that at the moment.

I haven't seen the calculations about "getting the numbers" specifically any testing of what leader would be most likely to do that.

If it is clear that an individual would not get the numbers and someone else would then that individual is an idiot kid for insisting me me me. Conversely if someone is insisting another won't get the numbers purely because that someone will order their MPs not to vote for them then that individual is an idiot kid too.

It's a failed piss up in a brewery at the moment that makes Johnson actually look good.

 

[lomiller]

As Nicola Sturgeon said a little while ago - 'designed to fail'. And predictably so.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. "