HairyOb1 Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 It's ok, we're well prepared for any upcoming tests on UK finance and the economy, nothing to see here... Stock up on dried pulses.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 11 hours ago, jonb2 said: I saw this Hairy. Waiting for CofV to comment. Great comments here. How our great leaders have been utterly, completely useless - starting with the very concept of Brexit as a thing. Doubt this will be recognised by the religionists though. So what if Scientology involves thetan aliens? It's all true which is why I give it all my life and my money. Pretty good example of too little too late. Not sure what the role is (I suspect neither did whoever wrote the job description). Even if they were in post now a few G7s are not going to make any meaningful difference to our preparedness for civil disruption. This sort of contingency planning takes a lot of time, to analyse what could go wrong and prepare/implement business continuity plans for a small/medium sized company in ordinary times could easily keep this little band occupied until March 19. Of course given the usual civil service recruitment timescales, plus a CTC security clearance, it is 50/50 whether they would even be in post by March 19.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said: Of course it’s different. I’m suggesting that we have in the past coped with worse than a little civil unrest. Can’t remember the last time I saw a milk bottle. Maybe wine bottles (emptied first. And not French ;-)) There was a point to suffering/dealing with it during the Second World War, not so much with Brexit. Edited October 10, 2018 by Confusion of VIs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 11 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said: We already know most countries are net benefactors - but thanks for sharing Hairy ?. Check out the tax avoiding nato underspending Luxembourg. Who was their PM? Our defence spending figures have been massively fudged for many years. If we really were spending 2% of GDP on defense we wouldn't have the shrinking hollowed out forces we have now. Look closely at any of our major weapons systems and you will see that behind the façade their capability has been compromised by cost cutting. Aircraft carriers that will never carry a full complement of aircraft and what they do carry compromised by having to be the VTOL model because we couldn't afford the catapult system required to launch the cheaper more capable standard version of the F35. Then we have escorts that lack the missile systems required to protect the carriers against even mid range opponents. Even the Astute, which I recall you praising, is a compromised design as cost cutting meant it had to use an older/oversized reactor/propulsion system. So it's larger and noisier than it could have been; and like so many of our cost cutting measures the final cost was actually increased by the attempt to save money. It also is relatively under armed considering its size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 This probably can be filed under No Sh1t Sherlock but it does raise the question, why would anyone think this is the time to stress test an already fiscally weak economy. The UK went into the last crisis with a relatively weak balance sheet, and a decade on its position is twice as bad Still it's all under control Quote The Treasury has agreed to undertake a review of the UK government balance sheet as part of its Budget later this month and is seeking to improve the management of assets, by pooling investments to save money on fees, charging more where it provides insurance to the private sector and using its buildings more effectively. It has also pledged to issue less debt linked to the retail price index after finding this exposed the government to inflation risks. Or maybe not, they must be a pretty short of financial nous if this represents a "finding" If you haven't already, it's time to hurry up and get a long mortgage fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Hun Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 6 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: There was a point to suffering/dealing with it during the Second World War, not so much with Brexit. Mood in JLR is pessimistic. Redundancies and a production move abroad is possible. Situation already dire for support staff https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/jaguar-land-rover-shutdown-brexit-15259791 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: Our defence spending figures have been massively fudged for many years. If we really were spending 2% of GDP on defense we wouldn't have the shrinking hollowed out forces we have now. Look closely at any of our major weapons systems and you will see that behind the façade their capability has been compromised by cost cutting. Aircraft carriers that will never carry a full complement of aircraft and what they do carry compromised by having to be the VTOL model because we couldn't afford the catapult system required to launch the cheaper more capable standard version of the F35. Then we have escorts that lack the missile systems required to protect the carriers against even mid range opponents. Even the Astute, which I recall you praising, is a compromised design as cost cutting meant it had to use an older/oversized reactor/propulsion system. So it's larger and noisier than it could have been; and like so many of our cost cutting measures the final cost was actually increased by the attempt to save money. It also is relatively under armed considering its size. Straw man. I wasn’t talkin about our defence spending - I was highlighting Luxembourg. Tax dodging and EU budged shirkers Luxembourg! No wonder they are so rich if the get everyone else to pay for it all. Go on, Defend Luxembourg’s spending... (oh wait the rest of us defend Lux lol!) Edited October 11, 2018 by GrizzlyDave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 7 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: Pretty good example of too little too late. Not sure what the role is (I suspect neither did whoever wrote the job description). Even if they were in post now a few G7s are not going to make any meaningful difference to our preparedness for civil disruption. This sort of contingency planning takes a lot of time, to analyse what could go wrong and prepare/implement business continuity plans for a small/medium sized company in ordinary times could easily keep this little band occupied until March 19. Of course given the usual civil service recruitment timescales, plus a CTC security clearance, it is 50/50 whether they would even be in post by March 19.. Agree. Given the rank/salary/timescales it’s clearly just for show and unlikely to do anything substantive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) 48 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: Straw man. I wasn’t talkin about our defence spending - I was highlighting Luxembourg. Tax dodging and EU budged shirkers Luxembourg! No wonder they are so rich if the get everyone else to pay for it all. Go on, Defend Luxembourg’s spending... (oh wait the rest of us defend Lux lol!) A straw man of your own making, who cares what Luxemburg spends on defence. As for tax evasion, it's hard to find a microstate that doesn't indulge in such practices. We do the same but on a much larger scale. In any case all of Luxumberg's figures are massively distorted by wealthy outsiders who just work there. What next a revelation that Mayfair is also quite rich Edited October 11, 2018 by Confusion of VIs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 31 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: A straw man of your own making, who cares what Luxemburg spends on defence. As for tax evasion, it's hard to find a microstate that doesn't indulge in such practices. We do the same but on a much larger scale. In any case all of Luxumberg's figures are massively distorted by wealthy outsiders who just work there. What next a revelation that Mayfair is also quite rich The uk has its own issues (discussed at length). Well I for one care about Lux Defence spending. It’s about honouring obligations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 24 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: The uk has its own issues (discussed at length). Well I for one care about Lux Defence spending. It’s about honouring obligations. So we shouldn't walk away without paying what we owe the EU then Dave... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 19 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said: So we shouldn't walk away without paying what we owe the EU then Dave... Straw man. Im not talking about the UK but Lux... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Hun Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said: In any case all of Luxumberg's figures are massively distorted by wealthy outsiders who just work there. QFT. Using Luxumberg as an example of anything is ridiculous beacause 60% of the workforce live outside the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said: The uk has its own issues (discussed at length). Well I for one care about Lux Defence spending. It’s about honouring obligations. 1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said: Straw man. Im not talking about the UK but Lux... Au contraire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 6 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said: Au contraire Do you know what a straw man is? So Lux should honour it’s NATO obligations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 On 08/10/2018 at 18:10, Peter Hun said: Should boost our exports by £10billion. It's brixtlogic that's more than £100billion. It's a shame that the only remainer response to such positive news is a straw man insult. Being welcomed with open arms into the Trans-Pacific Partnership would be an important positive if & when we meaningfully Brexit. The withdrawal of the US means that it's an opportunity for the UK slip in there. The TPP sounds like just what the EU should have been: a free trade economic block without the political creep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 44 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: Do you know what a straw man is? So Lux should honour it’s NATO obligations? Yes I do; your quote was "It's about honouring commitments". We have a commitment to pay what we owe. Do you believe in honouring that? Simple question, if it's about morality, honour... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) 29 minutes ago, highYield said: It's a shame that the only remainer response to such positive news is a straw man insult. Being welcomed with open arms into the Trans-Pacific Partnership would be an important positive if & when we meaningfully Brexit. The withdrawal of the US means that it's an opportunity for the UK slip in there. The TPP sounds like just what the EU should have been: a free trade economic block without the political creep. No, we're not being welcomed with open arms, we've been invited to join, and part of this will mean negotiations; it's by no means a slam dunk. And you actually mean the CPATPP Edited October 11, 2018 by HairyOb1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 But, in more important news.... Ironically, legislation bought in to appease Eurosceptics in the Conservative party in 2011 may mean we legally HAVE to have a referendum on any return of powers to the EU by the UK, it was called the "Referendum Lock". Going to court soon. It means we can't leave the EU without a referendum. It's all getting delightfully obtuse this Brexit. ECJ will rule on any appeals, regardless who wins or loses. However, it would be a delicious, toasty irony, if the very law brought in to appease Eurosceptics is the one that gives us a second referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said: Yes I do; your quote was "It's about honouring commitments". We have a commitment to pay what we owe. Do you believe in honouring that? Simple question, if it's about morality, honour... We pay what we legally owe - nothing less, nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 13 minutes ago, highYield said: It's a shame that the only remainer response to such positive news is a straw man insult. Being welcomed with open arms into the Trans-Pacific Partnership would be an important positive if & when we meaningfully Brexit. The withdrawal of the US means that it's an opportunity for the UK slip in there. The TPP sounds like just what the EU should have been: a free trade economic block without the political creep. Who says its positive news, that is just your assumption based on almost no knowledge of the subject and none at all about what the terms of the offer would be. What we do know is that it provides far from frictionless trade and the distances involved mean that the potential benefit of freer trade via TTP will never amount to more than a few percent of what we lose by leaving the single market. And maybe not even that once you factor in the losses arising from leaving the EU's trade deals with the TPP states, most importantly Japan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: We pay what we legally owe - nothing less, nothing more. Pensions, agreements made up to 2020, projects and funding up until then. All of that? Good man. All of our commitments within the budget to 2020. That's what we owe, plus pensions and payouts moving forward of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: We pay what we legally owe - nothing less, nothing more. You have changed your tune, Luxemburg has no legal obligation to pay anything into NATO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairyOb1 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 3 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Who says its positive news, that is just your assumption based on almost no knowledge of the subject and none at all about what the terms of the offer would be. What we do know is that it provides far from frictionless trade and the distances involved mean that the potential benefit of freer trade via TTP will never amount to more than a few percent of what we lose by leaving the single market. And maybe not even that once you factor in the losses arising from leaving the EU's trade deals with the TPP states, most importantly Japan. ...and no stage intervention for anything, like railways and I'd imagine this also opens up the NHS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said: Pensions, agreements made up to 2020, projects and funding up until then. All of that? Good man. All of our commitments within the budget to 2020. That's what we owe, plus pensions and payouts moving forward of course. If we've said "we will fund this or that". If it's just "well, we assumed you'd still be here and paying" that's not a commitment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.