I read that the TPF is trying to get a trade deal with the US. Presumably the UK government has some idea that we would get more leverage in negotiations as part of the TPF than if we try to negotiate on our own. Which, of course, makes nonsense of leaving the EU.
I read that the TPF is trying to get a trade deal with the US. Presumably the UK government has some idea that we would get more leverage in negotiations as part of the TPF than if we try to negotiate on our own. Which, of course, makes nonsense of leaving the EU.
Why? Is there anything particularly remarkable about them?
It was a joke. You asked why Brexiters think joining the TPP would help get a trade deal with the US. I queried whether you had any evidence that Brexiters think.
(Although joking that Brexiters have a reputation for having little to no grasp of foreign policy is a sort of answer.)
From Barnier's latest comments, we seem to be heading for a showdown in the Last Chance Saloon between Boris and Ursula, or possibly Boris and Emanuel. Heaven help us, we seem to have been here before.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to raise the subject, but I read that one of the options our leaders are pursuing is the possibility of joining the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership as a means of getting access to the US market. Can they be serious, in the face of the facts of geopraphy? Can anyone explain how the UK could possibly be entitled to join? Pitcairn Island, which I believe is still our responsibility?
Given that the USA withdrew from that partnership when Trump came into office, that would be irredeemably stupid even if it were possible.
The UK did apparently say in June it was interested in joining. It's not actually the first non-Pacific country to express interest. But access to the US market? Nope.
The particular institutions evolved slightly, and changed name. But, fundamentally the EEC was a political organisation that used trade as part of the process towards political union, and the EU is the same seeking the same end.
Yes, and that’s the number one reason why the UK has decided to leave. We want no part of any such political union.
Though, of course, I'd disagree .... such greater political union would be good for the UK, the other nations in the EU, and be a step towards wider international stability. Bring it on, says I. And, when we rejoin the EU in a decade or so (hopefully sooner) that would be a great day for all.
As I have said before ever greater union does not mean all becoming the same. Germany, Italy and particularly France have not lost their identity. It is a lie that if we don’t leave we will lose our Britishness. Whatever that means. The evidence is overwhelming.
“Kent could become the “toilet of England” in less than eight weeks unless dedicated loos are provided for thousands of lorry drivers who could be held up in the county for hours by post-Brexit border checks, campaigners have warned.”
I feel sorry for the lorry drivers and for those who have to clean up the mess. Even if adequate facilities are provided it will be a logistically huge task.
I think the continuing uncertainty means planning is very difficult - especially with Covid and reduced funds. Planners won’t want to waste money on facilities if they may not be needed.
Lee Cain, Johnson's Communications director (and Cummings mini-me) has resigned. Is this just exhaustion and frustration with the demands of an impossible job, or is realisation starting to dawn that Brexit can't be spun or joked away anymore, and the shit is about to hit the fan? (Or hit the lorry park for residents of Kent). Cain apparently resigned on being offered promotion to chief of staff, which is very odd indeed. (Actually on reflection not so odd - the Titanic's first mate would be unlikely to accept promotion as the iceberg loomed large.)
“Kent could become the “toilet of England” in less than eight weeks unless dedicated loos are provided for thousands of lorry drivers who could be held up in the county for hours by post-Brexit border checks, campaigners have warned"
Well quite. Sounds like Kent is going to be the toilet of England either way, the only question being whether the toilets will be plumbed in to the county sewage system, Portaloos, or behind the bushes at the roadside 🤢
Still... we have blue passports, so it's all going to be worth it. 🤦♀️
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
I think he's what is known in some circles as an "edgelord".
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
He believes he's a genius and wants to break things to prove it.
Still... we have blue passports, so it's all going to be worth it. 🤦♀️
To be manufactured, post Brexit, in France apparently. Is that what the Leave supporters were voting for? The freedom for the Government to hand over the contract of the manufactory of the British passport to an EU company, who will produce it in the old 'British' style of the blue and gold - a style always permitted by the EU regulations anyway, should the Government wished to have used it. Which they didn't. (A little detail not overly exploited during their 'the evil EU made me do it' campaign.)
Still. We get our curved bananas and sausage-labelled meat-tubes back, don't we? Except that was another couple of Daily Fail dogwhistle untruths being circulated to distract voters from the real issues.
Still. At least immigration is going down now. Albeit at a time when the NHS - a service famously reliant on migrant assistance and skills - is frantically advertising for more staff to cope with its worst ever crisis.
Still. At least we have Johnson's campaign promises to fall back on of 'easiest deal ever' and 'everyone will be falling over themselves to trade favourably with us' and 'no plan for a no deal Brexit because we'll get the best deal ever'. Reassuring, eh?
Being optimistic, Britain of course will survive Brexit. Bleeding, bitter and confused, perhaps. But surviving nevertheless. I base that on the fact that even though the Leavers 'won' and are even now heading into the sheer blissed-out Nirvanah of post-Brexit Britain, they still appear to constitute the whiniest, most unhappy, least secure, most fearful of the population. I can understand why losers, like myself, would want to whinge. It's the only satisfaction open to those who have lost out. Who would deprive us of the right to complain? But why are the 'winners' so miserable that they got their way?
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
My understanding (from various articles I’ve read) is that he believes a new industrial revolution is underway - one based around information and data - and that whichever country comes out of it with the strongest tech firms will dominate the globe in much the same way that the UK dominated after the last industrial revolution.
To that end, he thinks we have to use state funds to subsidise and boost the fortunes of UK tech businesses so that the UK can be an important country and dominate the world in the future. Which is something that the EU specifically prohibits. This he believes we have to be out of the EU.
Agree or disagree with that motivation if you want, but there’s a logic to it. It’s not just a case of everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid, selfish or evil.
His actions had many corollaries which were destructive, and with which we will live for years. Unconditional support for disruption often ends up in needless destruction; betting on small companies with no particular evidence other than "it's worth a punt" is indistinguishable from corruption, at very best, especiallywhen those small companies only come to the government's attention by being run by friends of friends of those in power. Or indeed by their relatives. He did not, and this government will not, adjust to the fact that they are governing, and not running some kind of tech firm themselves. This makes certain requirements which they simply will not bend themeselves to. Including acceptingn that those already in their posts and working to the ends of providing services are able to work well without constant disruption, and that their idolisation of this particular process frequently simply ends up destroying to no good purpose.
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
My understanding (from various articles I’ve read) is that he believes a new industrial revolution is underway - one based around information and data - and that whichever country comes out of it with the strongest tech firms will dominate the globe in much the same way that the UK dominated after the last industrial revolution.
To that end, he thinks we have to use state funds to subsidise and boost the fortunes of UK tech businesses so that the UK can be an important country and dominate the world in the future. Which is something that the EU specifically prohibits. This he believes we have to be out of the EU.
Agree or disagree with that motivation if you want, but there’s a logic to it. It’s not just a case of everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid, selfish or evil.
True, but I think the aspiration to dominate the world *is* evil. Empires are not good things.
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
My understanding (from various articles I’ve read) is that he believes a new industrial revolution is underway - one based around information and data - and that whichever country comes out of it with the strongest tech firms will dominate the globe in much the same way that the UK dominated after the last industrial revolution.
To that end, he thinks we have to use state funds to subsidise and boost the fortunes of UK tech businesses so that the UK can be an important country and dominate the world in the future. Which is something that the EU specifically prohibits. This he believes we have to be out of the EU.
Agree or disagree with that motivation if you want, but there’s a logic to it. It’s not just a case of everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid, selfish or evil.
I've been aware of this aspect of Cummings' "thought" for years now, since he first came to public prominence in Cameron's time. I've made brief forays into his unreadable blog, and read numerous articles on him by people who have more patience with his turgid prose.
It's profoundly unimpressive - there are many people now of retirement age who have spent their entire working lives at the cutting edge of IT and AI, who never needed government assistance to do so. To base our entire domestic and international agenda around the belief that the government needs to help kick start an information revolution is like saying that the government needs to sponsor the development of motor vehicles. The result would be like an IT version of a DeLorean, made by British Leyland. Anyone who believes in this much state intervention is a long way from libertarianism.
Apparently he can be very charming and charismatic on a personal level, which is presumably how he's inveigled his way into the inner circles of narcissists like Gove and Johnson. Cameron appears not to have been taken in by him, interestingly.
To base our entire domestic and international agenda around the belief that the government needs to help kick start an information revolution is like saying that the government needs to sponsor the development of motor vehicles. The result would be like an IT version of a DeLorean, made by British Leyland.
I really like that. It would mostly be an Allegro, perhaps with the Vanden Plas trim kit, and with the door hinges moved to the roof so that the doors opened upwards, and sometimes stayed there.
I am still mystified about what Dominic Cummings actually wants out of life. He is not a Tory, and publicly said the Tories don’t care about people like him. For him, personally, what is the point ?
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
My understanding (from various articles I’ve read) is that he believes a new industrial revolution is underway - one based around information and data - and that whichever country comes out of it with the strongest tech firms will dominate the globe in much the same way that the UK dominated after the last industrial revolution.
To that end, he thinks we have to use state funds to subsidise and boost the fortunes of UK tech businesses so that the UK can be an important country and dominate the world in the future. Which is something that the EU specifically prohibits. This he believes we have to be out of the EU.
Agree or disagree with that motivation if you want, but there’s a logic to it. It’s not just a case of everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid, selfish or evil.
True, but I think the aspiration to dominate the world *is* evil. Empires are not good things.
The reality is that it’s a world where you either dominate or are dominated. A bit like the Game of Thrones, where if you play it then you either win or you die, except in geopolitics there’s no option not to play.
A high-minded refusal to be the one dominating isn’t going to prevent someone dominating. Why not us? Do you think the world would be better off with us in charge or with China in charge?
Comments
TPF?
(Although joking that Brexiters have a reputation for having little to no grasp of foreign policy is a sort of answer.)
One hopes (hellishly) that it will be the Brexshit fans who come off worst, but that's not the way the world works, I'm afraid.
What's not to like?
Given that the USA withdrew from that partnership when Trump came into office, that would be irredeemably stupid even if it were possible.
The UK did apparently say in June it was interested in joining. It's not actually the first non-Pacific country to express interest. But access to the US market? Nope.
Yes, and that’s the number one reason why the UK has decided to leave. We want no part of any such political union.
https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54879209
O for the chaos of a John Major government!
Before anyone asks for the evidence, this is my opinion.
I think that's one for the Quote File!
https://tinyurl.com/y2u7qhcq
“Kent could become the “toilet of England” in less than eight weeks unless dedicated loos are provided for thousands of lorry drivers who could be held up in the county for hours by post-Brexit border checks, campaigners have warned.”
I feel sorry for the lorry drivers and for those who have to clean up the mess. Even if adequate facilities are provided it will be a logistically huge task.
I think the continuing uncertainty means planning is very difficult - especially with Covid and reduced funds. Planners won’t want to waste money on facilities if they may not be needed.
Well quite. Sounds like Kent is going to be the toilet of England either way, the only question being whether the toilets will be plumbed in to the county sewage system, Portaloos, or behind the bushes at the roadside 🤢
Still... we have blue passports, so it's all going to be worth it. 🤦♀️
I suspect he is a libertarian, but I can’t bring myself to read his blog so I don’t know.
I think he's what is known in some circles as an "edgelord".
He believes he's a genius and wants to break things to prove it.
To be manufactured, post Brexit, in France apparently. Is that what the Leave supporters were voting for? The freedom for the Government to hand over the contract of the manufactory of the British passport to an EU company, who will produce it in the old 'British' style of the blue and gold - a style always permitted by the EU regulations anyway, should the Government wished to have used it. Which they didn't. (A little detail not overly exploited during their 'the evil EU made me do it' campaign.)
Still. We get our curved bananas and sausage-labelled meat-tubes back, don't we? Except that was another couple of Daily Fail dogwhistle untruths being circulated to distract voters from the real issues.
Still. At least immigration is going down now. Albeit at a time when the NHS - a service famously reliant on migrant assistance and skills - is frantically advertising for more staff to cope with its worst ever crisis.
Still. At least we have Johnson's campaign promises to fall back on of 'easiest deal ever' and 'everyone will be falling over themselves to trade favourably with us' and 'no plan for a no deal Brexit because we'll get the best deal ever'. Reassuring, eh?
Being optimistic, Britain of course will survive Brexit. Bleeding, bitter and confused, perhaps. But surviving nevertheless. I base that on the fact that even though the Leavers 'won' and are even now heading into the sheer blissed-out Nirvanah of post-Brexit Britain, they still appear to constitute the whiniest, most unhappy, least secure, most fearful of the population. I can understand why losers, like myself, would want to whinge. It's the only satisfaction open to those who have lost out. Who would deprive us of the right to complain? But why are the 'winners' so miserable that they got their way?
My understanding (from various articles I’ve read) is that he believes a new industrial revolution is underway - one based around information and data - and that whichever country comes out of it with the strongest tech firms will dominate the globe in much the same way that the UK dominated after the last industrial revolution.
To that end, he thinks we have to use state funds to subsidise and boost the fortunes of UK tech businesses so that the UK can be an important country and dominate the world in the future. Which is something that the EU specifically prohibits. This he believes we have to be out of the EU.
Agree or disagree with that motivation if you want, but there’s a logic to it. It’s not just a case of everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid, selfish or evil.
True, but I think the aspiration to dominate the world *is* evil. Empires are not good things.
I've been aware of this aspect of Cummings' "thought" for years now, since he first came to public prominence in Cameron's time. I've made brief forays into his unreadable blog, and read numerous articles on him by people who have more patience with his turgid prose.
It's profoundly unimpressive - there are many people now of retirement age who have spent their entire working lives at the cutting edge of IT and AI, who never needed government assistance to do so. To base our entire domestic and international agenda around the belief that the government needs to help kick start an information revolution is like saying that the government needs to sponsor the development of motor vehicles. The result would be like an IT version of a DeLorean, made by British Leyland. Anyone who believes in this much state intervention is a long way from libertarianism.
Apparently he can be very charming and charismatic on a personal level, which is presumably how he's inveigled his way into the inner circles of narcissists like Gove and Johnson. Cameron appears not to have been taken in by him, interestingly.
I really like that. It would mostly be an Allegro, perhaps with the Vanden Plas trim kit, and with the door hinges moved to the roof so that the doors opened upwards, and sometimes stayed there.
The reality is that it’s a world where you either dominate or are dominated. A bit like the Game of Thrones, where if you play it then you either win or you die, except in geopolitics there’s no option not to play.
A high-minded refusal to be the one dominating isn’t going to prevent someone dominating. Why not us? Do you think the world would be better off with us in charge or with China in charge?