More post brexit referendum good news!!!!

[Paul Waine]

A few thoughts on labour supply, labour rates and EU migration:

Why are workers from central/east Europe attracted to jobs in UK? Wages and living standards are much lower in Poland, etc, etc. Unemployment is much higher in most of EU (Catalonia, a "wealthy" part of Spain, I understand has unemployment around 13% - the rest of Spain is higher). And, English is an "international language." So, if I'm ambitious and living in Central/East Europe taking a job in UK is a big step up - UK wages are much higher than I can get at home and, if I don't already speak English, learning English while working in the UK gives me the opportunity to progress further in many major world economies. I don't need to be unemployed at home in Central/East Europe, just ambitious to progress.

Why did Blair's government open the UK to EU immigration when Central/East European countries joined EU? I recall there have been some Labour "admissions" and maybe regrets about this policy - though I can't remember any details. A questioning person might consider that Labour judged that their existing supporters would always be their existing supporters - and adding a few more "low wage" immigrants would build their constituency for future years.

I'd forget Karl Marx. He was only writing "revolutionary theories" based on what he understood about 19th century England. The world is a very different place today.

[Healeywoodclaret]

You'll have to explain how having another vote would be a complete mockery of democracy.

Btw if there is another vote, it will be on the final terms of the deal, and one thing is for sure we will know for sure what we are voting for and what will happen whichever way we vote.

Probably a good thing to be honest.

Not going to happen Lancaster and you know it ........ Well not for another 40 years at least.

[RingoMcCartney]

A few thoughts on labour supply, labour rates and EU migration:

Why are workers from central/east Europe attracted to jobs in UK? Wages and living standards are much lower in Poland, etc, etc. Unemployment is much higher in most of EU (Catalonia, a "wealthy" part of Spain, I understand has unemployment around 13% - the rest of Spain is higher). And, English is an "international language." So, if I'm ambitious and living in Central/East Europe taking a job in UK is a big step up - UK wages are much higher than I can get at home and, if I don't already speak English, learning English while working in the UK gives me the opportunity to progress further in many major world economies. I don't need to be unemployed at home in Central/East Europe, just ambitious to progress.

Why did Blair's government open the UK to EU immigration when Central/East European countries joined EU? I recall there have been some Labour "admissions" and maybe regrets about this policy - though I can't remember any details. A questioning person might consider that Labour judged that their existing supporters would always be their existing supporters - and adding a few more "low wage" immigrants would build their constituency for future years.

I'd forget Karl Marx. He was only writing "revolutionary theories" based on what he understood about 19th century England. The world is a very different place today.

Hiya Paul,

Marx may have written in the 19th century Paul. But, his view that capitalism profits from a large pool of labour. Has as much relevance today, as it did then.

Re- eastern European migrants. What gives the UK the prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated, from other countries. Countries that may need them far more than us?

[Paul Waine]

Interesting article, Burnley is brexit Britain

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 24456.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A disgrace of an article about Burnley Football Club and a disgrace or an article trying to create an negative character out of the progress of Burnley FC and the referendum count in the town of Burnley.

So, "not a single Premier League minute this season has been played by a non-white footballer" and" the club has never signed a player from Asia or north Africa. Their only Latin American (goalkeeper Diego Penny) made just one league start a decade ago."

What happened to Andre Gray, Clarke Carlisle, Ian Wright (to pick out a few first teamers)? What about all the "non-white" players in the squads below the first team? What about our Greek goalie of a few years back?

"Never signed a player from Asia or north Africa..." How many football clubs have got the money to do that?

And, it seems for Jonathan Liew, the club's team bonding, discipline and ethics are just "a curiously repressive regime, characterised by petty rules, arbitrary punishments and a culture of secret denunciation."

I'm sure every single one of Burnley's fans - whatever their views re brexit - is looking forward to Burnley Football Club playing in Europe.

UTC

[nil_desperandum]

Not going to happen Lancaster and you know it ........ Well not for another 40 years at least.

What makes you so sure?.
A lot of analysts are now seeing it as a distinct possibility, and as the tide continues to move in favour of remain or at least a very soft brexit, both the main parties will be looking at some way of legitimising the final "deal". They can only do this if they have a binary vote on the terms of leaving. A General election is not appropriate, as this should really be fought on a whole range of policies.
Odds are still slightly against another referendum, but are narrowing all the time.

[Paul Waine]

Hiya Paul,

Marx may have written in the 19th century Paul. But, his view that capitalism profits from a large pool of labour. Has as much relevance today, as it did then.

Re- eastern European migrants. What gives the UK the prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated, from other countries. Countries that may need them far more than us?

Hi Ringo, I agree, the UK has/should have no prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated from other countries. On the other hand, it has always been that ambitious people (and, I don't limit this to people who are young and "better educated" - it can equally be the people who haven't had the opportunity to get an education where they were born) will move to where they see the opportunities for a better life for themselves. This is human nature. Of course, we see it in the central/east Europeans moving to where there are better jobs for them within the EU - and also the highly educated from west Europe moving to work in the banks and financial sector in London, rather than remain with lesser paying jobs in their home country. We also see it in the economic migrants - as well as refugees - from Africa and Asia. In earlier centuries that same ambitions led to people leaving the farms and moving to work in the coal mines and textile mills while the UK industrialised.

Why do I say "forget Marx?" He was wrong. He saw that communism/socialism would emerge with the collapse of capitalism in the industrialised economies of western Europe. There was no time that Marxism forecast communism in Russia - it was still an agrarian economy. And, Marx knows nothing about the world of the 21st century. "Capitalism" will profit because people demand the goods and services that "capitalism" will produce for them. If someone produces goods/services that people don't want - they go bust. And, today we demand technology - which doesn't appear to require a great deal of labour.

[randomclaret2]

Im not so sure about tech not requiring a great deal of labour. What it doesnt require is well paid western labour. The company in China which manufactures Apple products employs huge numbers of low paid Chinese workers.

[RingoMcCartney]

Hi Ringo, I agree, the UK has/should have no prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated from other countries. On the other hand, it has always been that ambitious people (and, I don't limit this to people who are young and "better educated" - it can equally be the people who haven't had the opportunity to get an education where they were born) will move to where they see the opportunities for a better life for themselves. This is human nature. Of course, we see it in the central/east Europeans moving to where there are better jobs for them within the EU - and also the highly educated from west Europe moving to work in the banks and financial sector in London, rather than remain with lesser paying jobs in their home country. We also see it in the economic migrants - as well as refugees - from Africa and Asia. In earlier centuries that same ambitions led to people leaving the farms and moving to work in the coal mines and textile mills while the UK industrialised.

Why do I say "forget Marx?" He was wrong. He saw that communism/socialism would emerge with the collapse of capitalism in the industrialised economies of western Europe. There was no time that Marxism forecast communism in Russia - it was still an agrarian economy. And, Marx knows nothing about the world of the 21st century. "Capitalism" will profit because people demand the goods and services that "capitalism" will produce for them. If someone produces goods/services that people don't want - they go bust. And, today we demand technology - which doesn't appear to require a great deal of labour.

I'm going out now Paul. So can't respond with the respect you deserve. I'm busy the next 24 hours. But will do my best to get back. Please don't think I'm swerving or avoiding. UTC

[Paul Waine]

Im not so sure about tech not requiring a great deal of labour. What it doesnt require is well paid western labour. The company in China which manufactures Apple products employs huge numbers of low paid Chinese workers.

Hi Random, I'm alluding to the growing capabilities of "machines" whether it's robots, artificial intelligence and the fact that the owners of FaceBook, Twitter, Google etc can "make vast fortunes" by "communicating with"/"advertising to" so many people without the need for large pools of unemployed labour to drive down the cost of labour.

In my view, tech does require a great deal of well educated labour. The labour markets for these skills will determine the rates of pay. I think it's still true that programmers in USA and UK (and other western nations) are more highly paid than programmers in India and China - and anywhere else with highly educated population.

Assembly line activities will always be lower paid - and this work will be performed where local wages are lower, provided the other conditions for these activities are favourable.

[randomclaret2]

No, fair comments Paul. It does all rather make for an unsettling and worrying future for many though. We cant all be highly skilled or highly educated or indeed highly intelligent. Starts me thinking around ideas of why we're here and what life is ultimately about, but maybe thats for another day ! If we win tomorrow all will be well again lol...

[If it be your will]

Hiya Paul,

Marx may have written in the 19th century Paul. But, his view that capitalism profits from a large pool of labour. Has as much relevance today, as it did then.

Re- eastern European migrants. What gives the UK the prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated, from other countries. Countries that may need them far more than us?

Quite right. What are The Phillips Curve and the NAIRU (and, from the BoE today: Inflationary pressures in a tight labour market) if they're not the modern equivalent of: Thus as the forest of uplifted arms demanding work grows ever thicker, the arms themselves grow ever thinner. (Wage Labour and Capital)?

I wouldn't recommend reading Marx particularly - or economics in general (it's an awful subject) - and he did get a lot wrong. But a lot of modern economics can be traced directly back to Marx, as any decent economics textbook will attest. Should we ignore all Keynes' work because he wrongly predicted The Problem of Leisure? Of course not.

I'm no adherent, and his books are pretty dull in the main, but to write him off as irrelevant would be stupid. Whether you like the guy or not, he was an absolute genius whose ideas still underpin a lot of modern economics.

[If it be your will]

No, fair comments Paul. It does all rather make for an unsettling and worrying future for many though. We cant all be highly skilled or highly educated or indeed highly intelligent. Starts me thinking around ideas of why we're here and what life is ultimately about, but maybe thats for another day ! If we win tomorrow all will be well again lol...

First task is not to get too existential about economics. It's not worth it. But at every step we should all be thinking "How do we make the market work for us" because for the last 40 years everyone seems to have got this sentence the wrong way round. So go on randomclaret2, if robots take everyone's job, what should we be doing to make this market work for us? If enough of us take this approach to any economic problem, we'll be fine. If we all listen to Paul Waine, he'll be fine.

[Lancasterclaret]

The bit before the robots do all the work will be fine, the bit after all the robots do all the work will be fine.

The bit inbetween will be bloody horrible though.

[If it be your will]

The bit before the robots do all the work will be fine, the bit after all the robots do all the work will be fine.

The bit inbetween will be bloody horrible though.

Even if they're all owned privately by a small number of people? You're more optimistic about the future than I am!

[Damo]

I know you are, but what am I?

Surely we have reached the bottom of this particular barrel here

[Damo]

Not going to happen Lancaster and you know it ........ Well not for another 40 years at least.

I'm not sure Lancaster understands why the referendum came about in the first place.
People put their fingers in their ears to avoid things they dislike.

[Spiral]

edit-deleted, because sod it, the last thing this thread needs is an argument on varying degrees of jingoism.

[Damo]

edit-deleted, because sod it, the last thing this thread needs is an argument on varying degrees of jingoism.

Really?
There is literally no way you could devalue this thread

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm sure that I do Damo

I'm not sure that some of your buddies realise that those problems are not going to go away by leaving the EU.

[barba]

The genuinely good news were the Q3 GDP figures released by the ONS

Q3 growth was 0.4% and the 2017 figures have been revised to 1.7% with some more credible than the IMF forecasting 1.8%.

If growth does finish at 1.8% then it will be only 0.1% lower than 2016 which in a hugely turbulent year does show the UK economy is truly resilient

Furthermore it would put us back to being one of the fastest growing G7 economies with those once again believing the often flawed H1 forecasts looking slightly silly.

So 'despite Brexit' the UK economy is holding up which for remainers and leavers alike should bring all some festive cheer

[Lancasterclaret]

Best bit about those figures was that it wasn't all driven by household debt as well.

Hopefully more signs that a soft brexit will be negotiated as well.

[Damo]

Ringo's postings are fun and I'm sure entertain the Remainers rather than trigger them. You and Damo on the other hand are the boring ones who seem on the verge of constantly being triggered like the little snowflakes you are.

As for Ringo I want to know what he has done to Turtle Bunker as it seems he has completely neutralised its threat on this thread

Ironic that you mention trigger so many times in a post where you come across as being upset by some posts

[Devils_Advocate]

Ironic that you mention trigger so many times in a post where you come across as being upset by some posts

Not at all this is one of my favorite threads to pass the time of day and Ringo is my #1 poster. You're the ones who always bring up being triggered so I was just passing comment on it as I perused the latest ramblings of our UTC Brexit experts

[CrosspoolClarets]

Just read the Johnathan Liew article that Paul referred to above. Just the type of city dwelling southerner who not only doesn’t get Brexit, he doesn’t get Burnley FC either.

He makes such an effort to try not to be condescending by saying Burnley is his favourite story of the season, but the belief in his own moral and intellectual superiority is laughable because it is so inaccurate.

[RingoMcCartney]

Hi Ringo, I agree, the UK has/should have no prerogative to assume it should be able to attract the young and better educated from other countries. On the other hand, it has always been that ambitious people (and, I don't limit this to people who are young and "better educated" - it can equally be the people who haven't had the opportunity to get an education where they were born) will move to where they see the opportunities for a better life for themselves. This is human nature. Of course, we see it in the central/east Europeans moving to where there are better jobs for them within the EU - and also the highly educated from west Europe moving to work in the banks and financial sector in London, rather than remain with lesser paying jobs in their home country. We also see it in the economic migrants - as well as refugees - from Africa and Asia. In earlier centuries that same ambitions led to people leaving the farms and moving to work in the coal mines and textile mills while the UK industrialised.

Why do I say "forget Marx?" He was wrong. He saw that communism/socialism would emerge with the collapse of capitalism in the industrialised economies of western Europe. There was no time that Marxism forecast communism in Russia - it was still an agrarian economy. And, Marx knows nothing about the world of the 21st century. "Capitalism" will profit because people demand the goods and services that "capitalism" will produce for them. If someone produces goods/services that people don't want - they go bust. And, today we demand technology - which doesn't appear to require a great deal of labour.

Hiya Paul, sorry for the delay. Family, festivities and football have taken priority these last 48 hours or so.

Your post is split into to basic points but both related.
Regards your first, Migration. I agree with a lot off the historical context you describe. But for me it misses out on a couple of important points. The effects of cheap labour on the indigenous population. And the unprecedented scale of migration into an already densely populated island. We often hear that employers in many sectors of the economy are dependent on foreign labour. "We simply can't get British workers to do the job" I'm not exaggerating when I say, I've never once heard the interviewer ask, "But what hourly rate are you paying?" Not once. What the honest statement should be is, "there are many sectors of the economy that are dependent on paying poverty wages, zero hour contracts in non unionised Dickensian working conditions" That would be more accurate. A self contradictory argument I often hear from Remaoners is, "freedom of movement has not lead to wage suppression or a race to the bottom for the lowest paid." And simultaneously arguing, "if we send all the eastern Europeans home, prices will rise cos employers will have to pay employees more" Any body with this opinion, in my view, is no better than a latter day master sweep. As for the scale. I don't think there's anybody that won't admit that uncontrolled mass immigration has, without doubt, put pressure on- schools, GPs, roads, infrastructure, house prices, the blood bank, landfill sites, finite energy resources, rent and importantly social cohesion.

I may be wrong on this, but I think I heard that in the last 30 odd years or so. This country has had more immigration than in the previous 1000 put together!

Unsustainable.

The idea that we need to, simply build more homes is immature. Bringing in more cheap eastern European builders to build more houses to accommodate more eastern European migrants to ....... is just a human pyramid scheme that could only end in an ill thoughtout disaster.

The "4 freedoms" of the EU. the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour. For me. Reduces workers to a simple, dehumanized, commodity. Great to the profits of multinstional companies. Not so the People.

I can never understand why people who see themselves as being on the Left are opposed to sensible controls on immigration. Controls that will not be detrimental in wages, living standards and prospects, for already hard pressed UK workers. In my opinion an open door policy that, that the likes of Owen Jones, James Obrian, Keir Starmer and Kinnock espouse. Forces the people at the very bottom to take the economic, financial and social brunt of such a policy.

Jones, Obrian, Starmer and Kinnock, have got far more in common with the likes off the exploitative Mike Ashley, than his beleaguered employees.

As for Marx. He was wrong on most things. However, his theory that a large pool of cheap unorganized Labour benefits the bosses not the workers. To me, proves that like a stopped clock you can be right, twice a day.

Don't know when, or if, you get chance to reply. But I hope you and your loved ones have a happy and peaceful Christmas Paul.

[Lancasterclaret]

Merry Xmas Ringo (and everybody else on this thread)

[RingoMcCartney]

Merry Xmas Ringo (and everybody else on this thread)

You too fella. And too all in the Lancasterclaret flood-free household!

[Paul Waine]

Hiya Paul, sorry for the delay. Family, festivities and football have taken priority these last 48 hours or so.

Your post is split into to basic points but both related.
Regards your first, Migration. I agree with a lot off the historical context you describe. But for me it misses out on a couple of important points. The effects of cheap labour on the indigenous population. And the unprecedented scale of migration into an already densely populated island. We often hear that employers in many sectors of the economy are dependent on foreign labour. "We simply can't get British workers to do the job" I'm not exaggerating when I say, I've never once heard the interviewer ask, "But what hourly rate are you paying?" Not once. What the honest statement should be is, "there are many sectors of the economy that are dependent on paying poverty wages, zero hour contracts in non unionised Dickensian working conditions" That would be more accurate. A self contradictory argument I often hear from Remaoners is, "freedom of movement has not lead to wage suppression or a race to the bottom for the lowest paid." And simultaneously arguing, "if we send all the eastern Europeans home, prices will rise cos employers will have to pay employees more" Any body with this opinion, in my view, is no better than a latter day master sweep. As for the scale. I don't think there's anybody that won't admit that uncontrolled mass immigration has, without doubt, put pressure on- schools, GPs, roads, infrastructure, house prices, the blood bank, landfill sites, finite energy resources, rent and importantly social cohesion.

I may be wrong on this, but I think I heard that in the last 30 odd years or so. This country has had more immigration than in the previous 1000 put together!

Unsustainable.

The idea that we need to, simply build more homes is immature. Bringing in more cheap eastern European builders to build more houses to accommodate more eastern European migrants to ....... is just a human pyramid scheme that could only end in an ill thoughtout disaster.

The "4 freedoms" of the EU. the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour. For me. Reduces workers to a simple, dehumanized, commodity. Great to the profits of multinstional companies. Not so the People.

I can never understand why people who see themselves as being on the Left are opposed to sensible controls on immigration. Controls that will not be detrimental in wages, living standards and prospects, for already hard pressed UK workers. In my opinion an open door policy that, that the likes of Owen Jones, James Obrian, Keir Starmer and Kinnock espouse. Forces the people at the very bottom to take the economic, financial and social brunt of such a policy.

Jones, Obrian, Starmer and Kinnock, have got far more in common with the likes off the exploitative Mike Ashley, than his beleaguered employees.

As for Marx. He was wrong on most things. However, his theory that a large pool of cheap unorganized Labour benefits the bosses not the workers. To me, proves that like a stopped clock you can be right, twice a day.

Don't know when, or if, you get chance to reply. But I hope you and your loved ones have a happy and peaceful Christmas Paul.

And, Happy Christmas to you, too, Ringo - and all fellow Clarets.

Marx - easy bit - I don't think it was Marx who first identified that "a large pool of cheap unorganised labour benefits the bosses not the workers." Simple, economic theory, if there is a plentiful supply then the price paid will be lower at all levels of demand. This is just as true about the supply of labour as it is true of all the "Christmas trinkets" that are being sold of cheap today, because the shops have still got plenty of stock.

I don't intend to dehumanise people by suggesting that we are all subject to the same "supply and demand" as any manufactured product or service. We are all equally, also, subject to gravity and other physical forces. In the same way that we have learnt to manage the force of gravity, so we can manage our interactions with the labour markets.

I fully agree that the number of immigrants, whether they are working in the City of London, in the NHS, or in the many low pay sectors have an impact on the supply of labour as well as an impact on housing needs, social infrastructure and much more. I live in London. For more than 20 years I've worked in offices that have counted as many as 35 different nationalities on the staff. I've enjoyed working with a very diverse group of colleagues. I'm used to hearing many different languages spoken when I'm out and about.

However, I feel our politicians have been too focused on London rather than the country as a whole. I understand it is a lot harder to welcome new people when there's a feeling of not enough for everyone who is already here. It's one of the reasons why I argue that parliament should be relocated to Manchester in 2022 and after 5 years there, move every 5 years between Newcastle, Birmingham, Bristol, London and, of course, Manchester. If we can get our MPs to "see how their constituents live" rather than "live in a Westminster bubble" we have a better chance of getting things right.

[nil_desperandum]

May I join Lancaster Claret in wishing all on this thread a very Merry Christmas. And may 2018 bring us all health and happiness- irrespective of which way the "brexit" debate begins to unravel. UTC.

[randomclaret2]

On the centennial of the Christmas Truce in the Trenches , a nice sentiment nil desperandum.

[Paul Waine]

On the centennial of the Christmas Truce in the Trenches , a nice sentiment nil desperandum.

I think that was Christmas 1914. But, there's no reason why we can't do it every year.

UTC

[randomclaret2]

Your'e right Paul. It was 1914. I got a bit carried away with the Peace and Goodwill to all UTC posters sentiment !

[RingoMcCartney]

I think that was Christmas 1914. But, there's no reason why we can't do it every year.

UTC

Thanks for the reply Paul. Thought provoking and considered as always.

Raising a glass of Burnley Brexiteer Bene n hot to one and all!

"Merry Christmas gents"

[Spijed]

"Merry Christmas gents"

And you!

[RingoMcCartney]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... h-december" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Anna Leach, the CBI’s head of economic intelligence, said: “As we head towards the end of 2017, UK manufacturers’ total order books remain at a near-30-year high, with export order books remaining at their strongest since the mid-1990s."

Great news.

[UpTheBeehole]

Great news for foreign purchasers, getting UK goods at rock bottom prices thanks to the weak pound.

[aggi]

David Davis seems upset by the fact that the EU are actually making preparations for Brexit:

[Bordeauxclaret]

Is David Davis on a mission to make Britain look as stupid as possible.

His own boss has said no deal is better than a bad deal a few times.

[nil_desperandum]

Is David Davis on a mission to make Britain look as stupid as possible.

Yes 17 million voters gave him that brief, and he is more than up to the challenge.

[Lancasterclaret]

Forget the rights and wrongs of Brexit for a moment.

This government are not fit for the challenge that we face. Its as simple as that.

[Paul Waine]

Strange comments from you guys. My understanding is that the UK has agreed to meet all our obligations, including all financial obligations, up to and beyond the period of exiting EU. Don't you think that the EU should also respect the UK's membership rights while we are still a member of the EU, or do you think we are heading towards the equivalent of a "constructive dismissal" situation?

[UpTheBeehole]

It looks as though Davis is now filling his undies because he sees that the EU are calling his bluff after he's been screaming about no-deal being fine for months.

[claretandy]

Strange comments from you guys. My understanding is that the UK has agreed to meet all our obligations, including all financial obligations, up to and beyond the period of exiting EU. Don't you think that the EU should also respect the UK's membership rights while we are still a member of the EU, or do you think we are heading towards the equivalent of a "constructive dismissal" situation?

Don't you know its the remoaner way, anything the EU does is good, anything the UK does is bad.

[aggi]

Strange comments from you guys. My understanding is that the UK has agreed to meet all our obligations, including all financial obligations, up to and beyond the period of exiting EU. Don't you think that the EU should also respect the UK's membership rights while we are still a member of the EU, or do you think we are heading towards the equivalent of a "constructive dismissal" situation?

I don't think there are any suggestions they're not meeting their obligations (as DD says, the chances of a successful legal challenge are low), just that they're preparing for life after Brexit. Rather than complaining about it, the UK should be doing the same which doesn't seem to be the case (probably because no one yet seems to have any idea how Brexit is going to work).

Politicians have spent all the time blathering about "No deal is better than a good deal" and then when the EU acts on this and informs its members what No Deal would mean the same politicians complain about it. We served notice that we were going to quit the EU, repeatedly stated that we may not sign a deal with the EU and now we're complaining that the EU telling its members this may harm British business.

[claretandy]

Since phase 1 was agreed i haven't head no deal mentioned much (apart from remoaners) it's about as likely as no brexit is, (about 5%)

[Lancasterclaret]

Davis: We must get serious about walking away without a deal.

EU: Okay let's get serious about walking away without a deal.

Davis: How dare you get serious about walking away without a deal!

[Right_winger]

Forget the rights and wrongs of Brexit for a moment.

This government are not fit for the challenge that we face. Its as simple as that.

It's not often that I find myself in total agreement with you but on this occasion you are bang on.

The brexit negotiations are yet another example of how our "career" politicians operate. For what it's worth I don't think labour would have fared any better either.

[Lancasterclaret]

No politician alive could have pulled off the Brexit that was promised.

But the way this lot have carried on (and labour as well) have made it much, much worse. They can't even decide what to do with Brexit, which really should have been decided by now.

[Imploding Turtle]

It's not often that I find myself in total agreement with you but on this occasion you are bang on.

The brexit negotiations are yet another example of how our "career" politicians operate. For what it's worth I don't think labour would have fared any better either.

So you think non-career politicians would have done better? I suppose you have one or two in mind. Care to share?

[Imploding Turtle]

The attitude of the remainers is better is it overall?

Turtle thinks leave voters are stupid because they didn't have Uni degrees therefore their research was flawed.

Go **** yourself.