[Siderite]

Just Iron wrote:

Thanks for a genuine and logical … and on the face of it ‘courteous’ response , Deerey. You have ‘previous’ on this …. which I appreciate.

I don’t think it’s a secret that I am not in favour of how the EU emerged out of the initial economic cooperation. Although I was roundly mocked for stating that some things should be judged over a longer timespan than a few years I still hold to that. There’s certainly plenty of evidence/activity across the EU to indicate that all may not be well in coming years.
I definitely agree that some of our present economic woes are attributable to the economic pain of leaving the EU. If I didn’t believe that the path it took was pretty well inevitable then I could even be tempted for the old days of purely economic union. But I’m not really even tempted on that.

(I’ll post this then add a bit more … unless I get jumped on first…. because I keep losing text and it’s a bit frustrating)

I can respect that view. There were many things which I didn’t like about the EU, it did seem to encroach and the electoral system was highly flawed. There are other aspects I did like, some things do benefit from a collaboration possible with the EU, with Russia a more evident threat it would have been a useful outlet to bond with allies, instead of having distractions over conflicts in trade.

What got me was the attitude of some who thought we could have our cake an eat it. As Gurny points out, a member’s club (which the EU, the Single Market etc are) will have conditions, including a payment to access the system and legislation for commonality. They were never going to offer us trade deals on the same level as within these markets, because to do so would render them pointless. Yet arguing this point with some was impossible, as it would be “the EU punishing us” or “they need us more than we need them, so they will undermine their own markets for us” or “you just hate this country and are arguing in bad faith.”

No, it was cold reality. I wish it wasn’t the case, I wish I could be more optimistic, but the economy matters and a poorer economic deal with Europe spells poorly for growth and financial betterment. Only last week it was revealed that exports to the EU has dropped by 16% since leaving. They make up the majority of our nearest neighbours, and those who aren’t are in the Single Market (e.g. Norway). Those who think CANZUK or trade deals with tiny nations like Fiji can make up for it are deluding themselves. Trade is usually most common with neighbours, due to logistics and other things. A harmful relationship would be to our detriment with the EU, as we have seen. Any future trade deal would be on their terms, we don’t have that much leverage and all the guff about the no deal ‘nuclear option’ didn’t produce much. We were told of the necessity of that, yet we still have a deal most are unhappy with, one which doesn’t see us better off and one which didn’t see the EU come flocking to us for deals on our terms, as was implied.

Sure, people can say that the EU is in bad shape, but they have done for years, and it still carries on. Will it for our lifetime? Who knows? However, we can only judge on the now, not hypotheticals and wishful thinking from some, and the decision currently doesn’t look that promising, economically, to me.

[Siderite]

Yawn.

1 user thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights

[Siderite]

I think it’s a twee non-story, but Pravda this isn’t. I don’t see the message of democracy being bad laid out here.

[Siderite]

I didn’t say that.

[Siderite]

Well, Daws is only caretaker, so appointing a permanent manager wouldn’t be sacking him. It wasn’t sacking him when Knill took over from Baraclough, after Daws was in charge for a game or two. He’d most likely return to his usual role as academy manager.

Of course things are different now, and his caretaker stint is lasting longer due to the shambles the club is in. However, I am not convinced he is what we need long term. Sure, Swann is the bigger problem, but if we have any hope we need to have a proper manager in place. Though, I have little hope for this.

[Siderite]

I can imagine, though I wish I could have seen them earlier, as I am not the biggest fan of their more recent stuff and the allegations against Win do leave a sour taste in my mouth (though, I try to separate the art from the artist).

It would have been good if I could have caught them when they were at the Baths Hall a few years ago.

[Siderite]

Oh, I am not knocking everything about nowadays. The internet has meant that we can easily listen to old tracks, even obscure ones, with a quick YouTube search. In the past it was much harder; either you buy the record or hope it comes on the radio. I am certainly not one of those who bemoans how everything was better in the past.

[Siderite]

Northumbiron wrote:

“I got bored of “bands ” in the 90s”

Boy! Have you missed a lot!

Certainly in the indie (in its true meaning) and underground scene, in my opinion. Bands don’t really crack the charts now, and those that do tend to be over-produced like their pop compatriots. See Imagine Dragons, quite possibly the blandest band in history. Fitting when so much of the charts are bland singer-songwriters like Sheeran, the worse George Ezra and Tom Walker or singers screaming their lungs to convey emotion over a dull synthetic beat and annoying grime music about how flash their car is and how many women they attract.

All a matter of opinion, but the charts is so bad. Some might say it was always this way, but in the past gems became household names, even if they weren’t all initially well known, like Bowie, Iggy Pop etc.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[Siderite]

[Siderite]

I wish I could have some optimism. We have changed managers, chairman taken less interest in team affairs and his son is no longer our chief scout. Yet it gets worse.

[Siderite]

Sure. I am protesting because it makes the country a laughing stock. I don’t want us to be.I am not overly worried about him being the unstoppable behemoth his fans make him out to be.

I am angry, not upset.

[Siderite]

Lol. I am not upset. Angry for the sake of the nation, but laughing because the Tories may be shooting themselves in the foot.

[Siderite]

Looks like the metropolitan liberal elite who frequent the Mail Online aren’t too happy:

[Siderite]

I refer to my point above. Our choice is most likely to be Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson. I could have worded it differently, but essentially my point is that Johnson is so bad for the country that these other two, comparatively untarnished, are less of an issue than a guy removed a few months ago for dishonesty coming back again when there is an investigation above his head. The instability would be huge and he could tumble down again rapidly.

[Siderite]

64 wrote:

Mordaunt ? you claim to be a centrist

Where did I say I supported her? I don’t. I just think she is preferable to Johnson, for all his problems with honesty and not being so shady.

[Siderite]

Iron-awe wrote:

I think the majority just want our country run in a more reasoned sensible way with everyone in society get a reasonable chance to live a fair and better life.

For the country’s sake it has to be someone like Mordaunt or Sunak. However, if the Tories want to have a death wish with more instability and division under Johnson, then I can find solace in laughter. After all, Labour really aren’t going to be quivering in their boots at this. The Conservatives needs booting out and replenishing with fresh talent after failing. The situation is not tenable with the clowns in charge and is unlikely to change given they all have their tepid excuses for it.

[Siderite]

Yes, please, go for Boris, Tories. It could be political suicide.

https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-21/damning-partygate-evidence-means-boris-johnson-could-be-gone-by-christmas

[Siderite]

Hmmm. The party who rules us does affect me and all around me.

I am far less bothered than I seem on the debating front. I think a lot, enjoy debate and trying to see how others think and maybe learn a thing or two, while expressing my own opinion in the (probably vain) hope others can understand me better and maybe learn something themselves. Of course I cannot expect people to change opinions because of my arguments for many reasons, including the arrogance it would take for me to assume that I am right on everything and can sway every mind I interact with. Moreover, thinking about hot topics is a way of keeping my mind active and realising what’s needed to change the world for the better, in accordance with my political beliefs and principles.

[Siderite]

Wait for what? Do you have a crystal ball? I would be more than happy for him to get in with his approval ratings from an electoral prospective for Labour.

I wonder how those who treat him like a hurricane of votes would react and spin if the Tories lose a majority. I am sure there would be no self-reflection for these certain proclamations, even after many did the same with Truss! Loads told us not to underestimate her.

[Siderite]

You keep saying this. Of course he might do well, but he is not some certain power of nature. His approval ratings aren’t good, and approval ratings tend to decline with time.

What’s more, a significant number of MPs aren’t on his side, so expect more instability.

[Siderite]

An MP found unfit for office and is under investigation for breaking parliamentary standards. If he comes back as PM then how do the Tories expect to treat them as a serious party?

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Bigger success rate than Liz!!

Bucks for PM!

[Siderite]

We did do with Laws when Knill was sacked. Does this make Laws Boris in awaywego’s analogy? X-)

[Siderite]

I think I have made my feelings for Corbyn quite clear, and it’s the opposite of support. In fact, I would be willing to bet my feelings are more negative for that anti-Semitic, irascible, Putin apologising crank than Bucks’s.

[Siderite]

It’s all a bit of battling against reality to try and argue for Trussinomics now. The impact was severe from the start and anyone trying to pursue it would not because of this shambles.

Trickle down economics does not work and there is no evidence that we would have seen the growth required from the plan. Growth happens when the middle and lower classes see a rise in wealth. This was a big benefit to the very rich and no-one else, and their wealth does not tend to filter down.

Now I await the disdain and attacks for daring to disagree civilly, while being made out to be a villain out to get the usual suspect.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Siderite]

I think every leader should be taken seriously as an opponent, but I don’t have as much confidence as those making out he’s some unstoppable behemoth,

[Siderite]

Not really, it’s just my opinion based on my own interpretation of events. It just amuses me that people try and make out Johnson is some unstoppable behemoth, when there are signs he isn’t. It’s like a few months of poor election results and poor approval ratings have been forgotten.

Of course he could win, but we can only base our opinions on signs before an event (like an election) happens. I don’t see him as some unstoppable force or great worry when the Tories are a mess.

[Siderite]

It would me, but I suspect for different reasons.

It’s like the calamitous election results earlier this year have been forgotten, as others pretend he is some guaranteed certainty for success.

[Siderite]

Just me watch what? You do realise that having a discredited leader with poor approval ratings is something Labour would relish?

Boris Johnson had a net approval rating of -33.3% at the end of his premiership.

That compares to Starmer's current rating of +1.0% and Truss' -58.3%.https://t.co/kz25YAmvxC pic.twitter.com/zomUPK6aTk

— Election Maps UK (@ElectionMapsUK) October 20, 2022

[Siderite]

Why? His approval rating nose dived. There is no room for complacency, but there was a reason why Labour were happy to see him stumble on towards the end.

[Author]

Posts