EU referendum are you in or out

[merman]

It sickened me to wake up this morning and see Johnson dismissing concerns about the language he was using as "humbug", and that we have to get on with Brexit.

No.
Brexit is Government policy.
Parliament is there to scrutinise and amend that policy.
The idea he can call an Election just to get a Parliament that will bend to his will is NOT democracy.

Oh, and he lost another vote - to put Parliament on recess during the Tory Party Conference. Several of the rebels who lost the whip were going to abstain, but voted against him due to his language in the debate.

MPs are getting death threats, including one to a prominent female MP quoting Boris's own words about being "dead in a ditch"


Worst. Prime Minister. Ever.

[Harlequin]

Boris propaganda (to describe it more accurately) broadcast in primary schools:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/25/brexit-p ... -10809109/
Disturbing. Proper Orwellian shit
It's telling that when asked about it he just skirted the issue and gave some random guff about investing in schools.

The Grauniad has further information on that.

[gilesgoat]

Boris propaganda (to describe it more accurately) broadcast in primary schools:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/25/brexit-p ... -10809109/
Disturbing. Proper Orwellian shit
It's telling that when asked about it he just skirted the issue and gave some random guff about investing in schools.

The Grauniad has further information on that.

Even in a place like Italy I don't think it would be even legal to do a thing like that ... "political propaganda in a school" ? Are you insane ? And what about "equality with other parties that can't afford to do it ?" .. that would be quite an amount of shit ..

Also "political propaganda" OUT of election times ? Is that legal ? We have regulations in Italy about that !

[PFVA]

Giles, Have you obtained already residency to stay in the UK in case of Brexit? I hear that the software for the application is a bit messed up.

[gilesgoat]

Giles, Have you obtained already residency to stay in the UK in case of Brexit? I hear that the software for the application is a bit messed up.

I got the "Indefinite Leave to Stay", I did check all the various government sites and things from my undertsanding "I don't need anything else".

The only thing that bothers me A LOT is that in essence "I don't have any paper in my hand stating so" and it's been said since beginning that "the thing is only digital".

While it's possible to log in a certain Government site and check and says "yes you have it" in my hands I have "nothing to prove it"

[edit] - said that, suppose all goes tits up as it will in some way or another ... "for how long one can legally stay in UK with no visa at all ?" and how many times could you let's say go in/out UK per year ?

Or it's going to be a thing like "after 10 times you been in UK you'll never be here again ?".

It's a £$"$£"$"£$ SHIT "£$£"$"£ CRAP "£$"£$£" .. that .. "in a certain way did work" because trust me I started to hear "from different EU sources" people saying things like "I don't want to go in UK any more" not at least until "the mess will be sorted out" .. which could mean .. in another 40 years time .. or never ...

[edit2] - must me said, especially in this moment, UK REALLY LOOKS AND FEEL VERY MESSED UP !!!

.. and Italy is no better .. I don't see any "good future" at all ...

[Cloudane]

Boris propaganda (to describe it more accurately) broadcast in primary schools:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/25/brexit-p ... -10809109/
Disturbing. Proper Orwellian shit
It's telling that when asked about it he just skirted the issue and gave some random guff about investing in schools.

The Grauniad has further information on that.

Glad the government covered for the useless PM and answered the question, which at least sets my mind at ease somewhat.

What a useless, single issue PM. If it's not about Brexit, no matter how serious the question, it just get some dumb soundbite answer - all he had to do was say something like "I thank the honourable lady for the rightful concern she brings up, I can assure her that this government would not use propaganda on our children; I shall instruct my education secretary to look into the incident and write to the honourable lady henceforth" - job done. But that would be normal.

[gilesgoat]

I open the news, I Boris coming out with some other shit, I close the news I don't want to see more ...

And I was thinking that the one with the toupee was the worst .. now we have 'toupee 2' ..

[tufty]

And I was thinking that the one with the toupee was the worst

Paul Daniels?

You'll brexit. Not a lot, but you'll brexit.

[merman]

They are selling GET BREXIT DONE mugs at the Tory Party Cesspit... I mean, Conference.

The only mugs are those who believed the headline "Boris promises 40 new hospitals".

Turns out it's old hospitals refurbished or gutted, plus money for one trust to rebuild the community hospitals the Tories knocked down/closed in the 1980s. And there would only be SIX new hospitals in the next five years, with even Health Secretary Matt Hancock completely unclear on how the rest of this supposedly "biggest NHS building programme"* is going to be funded.

Meanwhile two flagship new hospitals lie empty and there's a shortage of 40,000 nurses for the hospitals we have got. Who will staff these new hospitals, when thousands of Europesn staff are planning to leave post-Brexit? And we can't recruit more from Europe, because they won't earn enough under the draconian new immigration rules.



*Even if you take the 40 as gospel, New Labour built more from 1997-2010

[gilesgoat]

They are selling GET BREXIT DONE mugs at the Tory Party Cesspit... I mean, Conference.

The only mugs are those who believed the headline "Boris promises 40 new hospitals".

Turns out it's old hospitals refurbished or gutted, plus money for one trust to rebuild the community hospitals the Tories knocked down/closed in the 1980s. And there would only be SIX new hospitals in the next five years, with even Health Secretary Matt Hancock completely unclear on how the rest of this supposedly "biggest NHS building programme"* is going to be funded.

Meanwhile two flagship new hospitals lie empty and there's a shortage of 40,000 nurses for the hospitals we have got. Who will staff these new hospitals, when thousands of Europesn staff are planning to leave post-Brexit? And we can't recruit more from Europe, because they won't earn enough under the draconian new immigration rules.



*Even if you take the 40 as gospel, New Labour built more from 1997-2010

Are we here AGAIN ???!!!!

Wasn't enough "that bus promising all that money to NHS" then when someone pointed "it's impossible" and when they actually did *NOTHING* they said "Ah that was only propaganda !!"

You know ? I have to say a part of me thinks "It should be really go all VERY much into SHITE MAYBE some people with some too hard heads will learn somethign from all this !"

But probably not .. they'll die swearing to God that "It's ALL AND ONLY an EU fault !!" ..

You cannot change some people at all ...

[snaff]

They are selling GET BREXIT DONE mugs at the Tory Party Cesspit... I mean, Conference.

The only mugs are those who believed the headline "Boris promises 40 new hospitals".

Turns out it's old hospitals refurbished or gutted, plus money for one trust to rebuild the community hospitals the Tories knocked down/closed in the 1980s. And there would only be SIX new hospitals in the next five years, with even Health Secretary Matt Hancock completely unclear on how the rest of this supposedly "biggest NHS building programme"* is going to be funded.

Meanwhile two flagship new hospitals lie empty and there's a shortage of 40,000 nurses for the hospitals we have got. Who will staff these new hospitals, when thousands of Europesn staff are planning to leave post-Brexit? And we can't recruit more from Europe, because they won't earn enough under the draconian new immigration rules.



*Even if you take the 40 as gospel, New Labour built more from 1997-2010

When Brown/Osborne messed up the economy they printed money to cover it up. When you print money you can't just stop, you have to keep printing more and more. First it goes into house prices, then rotates out of that into infrastructure projects like we are seeing now with these hospitals. The money printing also lowers interest rates which creates loads of debt-laden zombie companies like Thomas Cook. As many more companies like this drop out of business you get the spare labour you need for the infrastructure projects so you don't need to import workers.

[Barney]

When Brown/Osborne messed up the economy they printed money to cover it up. When you print money you can't just stop, you have to keep printing more and more. First it goes into house prices, then rotates out of that into infrastructure projects like we are seeing now with these hospitals. The money printing also lowers interest rates which creates loads of debt-laden zombie companies like Thomas Cook. As many more companies like this drop out of business you get the spare labour you need for the infrastructure projects so you don't need to import workers.

That... somehow seems a bit of a stretch?

[KlaxonCow]

The money printing also lowers interest rates which creates loads of debt-laden zombie companies like Thomas Cook. As many more companies like this drop out of business you get the spare labour you need for the infrastructure projects so you don't need to import workers.

So the ex-employees of Thomas Cook - a travel agent - are going to become the construction workers for these hospitals?

Your model here seems to treat labourers as being 100% interchangeable. This is not factually the case.

You cannot just immediately jump from the routine task of sorting out travel insurance to an instant understanding of materials science, stresses and loads, bricklaying, etc.. You don't insta-jump from using a computer at a desk to the manually dexterous skill of plastering a ceiling at height without training and practice. Not least because you won't physically be capable and your arms will be instantly knackered - reducing productivity - until you've built up that muscular capacity from just, well, doing it a lot. Not least because that's potentially dangerous work and you've got to, at minimum, have the health and safety briefing to be in legal compliance, much less the moral compliance that one presumes you don't actually want people getting injured on your watch.

This fails to take account of the different nature of different labourers. There aren't that many women in construction work, but they're the majority at the front desks of travel agencies.

Of course, we could deep-dive into the gender politics of why this is the case, but suffice to say that, regardless of why it happens, it happens. And you must deal with the reality that's in front of you, even if it's not the reality you'd like to see in the world. And so the workforce you want to shift prefers labour with a social element, avoids dangerous physical work (did you know that 92.5% of workplace fatalities are men?), has less muscular capacity, has a biology where it's inadvisable for them to be routinely lifting heavy weights, etc., etc..

The issue you'll face is that these labourers are not only unskilled with regard to what you're now wanting them to do, they're unmotivated to that kind of work as well, so you'll face an uphill struggle convincing any of them to shift at all.

So where, in the government plan, is the budget for the necessary retraining? The incentives to encourage labourers to choose these new career paths you've got in store for them - because we're not China and we don't just legally compel people to do what the state says (indeed, wouldn't that be massively counter to conservative philosophy? For the state to be deciding who goes where, without any regard to their voluntary consent as a free individual to not be compelled by government?)

Your suggestion is chock-full of horrid impracticalities. It might seem nice and dandy in theory, but reality simply does not agree with you.

[gilesgoat]

The money printing also lowers interest rates which creates loads of debt-laden zombie companies like Thomas Cook. As many more companies like this drop out of business you get the spare labour you need for the infrastructure projects so you don't need to import workers.

So the ex-employees of Thomas Cook - a travel agent - are going to become the construction workers for these hospitals?

Your model here seems to treat labourers as being 100% interchangeable. This is not factually the case.

You cannot just immediately jump from the routine task of sorting out travel insurance to an instant understanding of materials science, stresses and loads, bricklaying, etc.. You don't insta-jump from using a computer at a desk to the manually dexterous skill of plastering a ceiling at height without training and practice. Not least because you won't physically be capable and your arms will be instantly knackered - reducing productivity - until you've built up that muscular capacity from just, well, doing it a lot. Not least because that's potentially dangerous work and you've got to, at minimum, have the health and safety briefing to be in legal compliance, much less the moral compliance that one presumes you don't actually want people getting injured on your watch.

This fails to take account of the different nature of different labourers. There aren't that many women in construction work, but they're the majority at the front desks of travel agencies.

Of course, we could deep-dive into the gender politics of why this is the case, but suffice to say that, regardless of why it happens, it happens. And you must deal with the reality that's in front of you, even if it's not the reality you'd like to see in the world. And so the workforce you want to shift prefers labour with a social element, avoids dangerous physical work (did you know that 92.5% of workplace fatalities are men?), has less muscular capacity, has a biology where it's inadvisable for them to be routinely lifting heavy weights, etc., etc..

The issue you'll face is that these labourers are not only unskilled with regard to what you're now wanting them to do, they're unmotivated to that kind of work as well, so you'll face an uphill struggle convincing any of them to shift at all.

So where, in the government plan, is the budget for the necessary retraining? The incentives to encourage labourers to choose these new career paths you've got in store for them - because we're not China and we don't just legally compel people to do what the state says (indeed, wouldn't that be massively counter to conservative philosophy? For the state to be deciding who goes where, without any regard to their voluntary consent as a free individual to not be compelled by government?)

Your suggestion is chock-full of horrid impracticalities. It might seem nice and dandy in theory, but reality simply does not agree with you.

And if you'd be in Italy, especially in my region, you'd have another serious problem .. the brick laying industry is "dominated" by Albanians, Slovenian, Hroatian coming "from just 1 hour drive away" ( well not Albania but it's full of them still ) that work faster, harder, better than you and are much cheaper and they already took all those jobs ...

Now there's a demand of brick laying in Italy and some companies "would hire any Italian/anyone that will", guess what ? Almost no italian "young and strong guys" that could do that want to do that ( they all dream about being YT/Twich celebrities or such ), I had a cousin that took that job was well paid but was HARD work.

He stayed a few years, made some money then found another less heavy job.

Job switching is not exatly "snap the fingers and" .. plus sometime it's not even so easy to find the ways to learn a new job.

But overall "yeah go to brick laying" .. WHO EVER SAID "brick laying needs you ?" .. those jobs are already taken I am afraid ...

[merman]

They are selling GET BREXIT DONE mugs at the Tory Party Cesspit... I mean, Conference.

The only mugs are those who believed the headline "Boris promises 40 new hospitals".

Turns out it's old hospitals refurbished or gutted, plus money for one trust to rebuild the community hospitals the Tories knocked down/closed in the 1980s. And there would only be SIX new hospitals in the next five years, with even Health Secretary Matt Hancock completely unclear on how the rest of this supposedly "biggest NHS building programme"* is going to be funded.

Meanwhile two flagship new hospitals lie empty and there's a shortage of 40,000 nurses for the hospitals we have got. Who will staff these new hospitals, when thousands of Europesn staff are planning to leave post-Brexit? And we can't recruit more from Europe, because they won't earn enough under the draconian new immigration rules.



*Even if you take the 40 as gospel, New Labour built more from 1997-2010

Are we here AGAIN ???!!!!

Wasn't enough "that bus promising all that money to NHS" then when someone pointed "it's impossible" and when they actually did *NOTHING* they said "Ah that was only propaganda !!"

You know ? I have to say a part of me thinks "It should be really go all VERY much into SHITE MAYBE some people with some too hard heads will learn somethign from all this !"

But probably not .. they'll die swearing to God that "It's ALL AND ONLY an EU fault !!" ..

You cannot change some people at all ...

The Tories have promised over £3 billion in extra NHS spending since 2017.
Less than 3% of that has actually reached the NHS.


Snaff, Gordon Brown didn't mess up the economy. The worldwide financial crisis, caused by the American sub-prime mortgage market, did that.

Brown bailed out the banks to keep businesses going.
It's Osborne and his successors that have messed up - TRIPLED the national debt and unbalanced the economy. Further proof today - GDP shrank by 0.2% in the second quarter of 2019.

And Brexit is forecast to reduce GDP by up to 9%.
Don't believe me or "project fear"? That's the prediction of a Nobel Prize-winning economist.