952 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 28, 2019 15:33:43 GMT
via mobile
Post by vdcni on Sept 28, 2019 15:33:43 GMT
Btw, my cousin remarked that, driving up and down to London, the London area is full of billboards about Brexit. We don't have them up here. Is it more of a south-east preoccupation? The government's advertising campaign I assume. It will be a national campaign but there is a much greater concentration of OOH advertising in London so they may be using more there than the rest of the country. |
|
5,707 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 28, 2019 15:46:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by lynette on Sept 28, 2019 15:46:22 GMT
I’m only away a week and we get ‘lustful interludes’ on the Board. Straight out of a Restoration comedy that one, Neil.
I’m still away but I’m watching....
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 28, 2019 16:05:33 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2019 16:05:33 GMT
I know people don’t like Corbyn but I honestly fail to understand all the “sympathise with Russia” stuff. In the Skripal case he asked to wait until there was evidence before taking action....I think that is a reasonable action to take (do we all remember that dodgy dossier about the non-existent weapons of mass destruction that cause a war, people?) And why does the Conservative party take money from Russian oligarchs with links to Russia (even wining and dining them with personal meetings that have been won at party auctions) and somehow it’s Corbyn who is the Russian sympathiser? The papers lie. They slant things the way they want to. And who owns the papers and sets the agenda in this country? I know it’s hard to take but the trick of the rich has ALWAYS been to pit the poor against the poor. If the poor stood together the world might be a different place. I’m not asking for communism...I don’t actually mind the rich being rich IF everyone has a good basic standard of life - the right to health, food and shelter and self respect. And don’t say to me that everyone can get there if they work hard enough....we all know people who need more help than others and we should be compassionate enough to help them unconditionally. People should be able to live secure safe lives. And don’t tell me that Conservatives care about all this - the evidence I have from my own experience and eyes is that they talk about these things but then just take it out on the poorest and most vulnerable in society. Open your eyes. The Labour Party is talking about morals and caring for people. If you hate Corbyn try and work out why you would let dislike of this man make you vote for Conservatives who really do not care about society. JC is seen as very left wing or he certainly was in the past. With our right leaning press and a lot of big industries controlled by people of the same mindset it just doesn't go well together. As I've said before I'm no great fan of JC so I'm just going to state how I think others see him. Also I'll throw in does he have the right sort of top team around him. One further point though is if the Tories go into an election with Boris as the leader then people might actually be less worried about voting for JC as the thought of him as PM might be less scary option than it might have been. I do think that the Labour Party has now moved to the left and their next leader will be someone of a similar mindset politically to JC. Who this is I wouldn't like to say, I'd rule out John McDonnell as he is in his late 60's and had a heart issue a few years back. Diane Abbott at 66 would also have age counting against her and would be crucified by the press. But a more media savvy, good orator and dynamic leader with the same policies as JC could really get the younger voters rallying behind them. |
|
5,066 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 28, 2019 22:12:12 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 28, 2019 22:12:12 GMT
Dominic Cummings’ three years doing we know not what in Russia, Aaron Banks’ multiple meetings with Russian contacts, Farage’s strangely close relationship with a Russian propaganda TV station, the list is much, much longer. This is the modern, Russian kleptocracy. Not the long gone old communist state sometimes revered by very, very old Labour. The modern state being one that has done more than any other to destabilise the UK and, to troll us, by using our streets as a convenient murder location. There is a problem with the word traitor being off limits. As with Trump’s mafia shakedown of the Ukraine, the problem is that the Leave campaign is up to its neck in connections to our most immediate enemy. Nigel Farage works as an host on LBC. On the odd occasion I have heard his programme, always good to peer the other side of the garden fence, well I digress. Anyway I made a point of listening to his show after Comrade Skripal was assassinated in Salisbury I was surprises how quick he blamed in on an unemployed Russian actor, how did he know this so quickly, like 48 hours later? When the Mullenberg report came out a year or two ago, partially clearing Trump at the time, how quick was Mr F to praise his other great Comrade. |
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Sept 29, 2019 16:50:44 GMT
The government is being stopped calling a General Election, stopped honouring the referendum result, I've already said it a million times, but once more won't hurt - the referendum did not condone No Deal, so stopping No Deal is not dishonouring the referendum result. Fine distinctions are critically important, and it's astonishing how many people don't bother to think about them. Still curious about what you think the ref did and didn't condone? |
|
754 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Sept 29, 2019 17:28:49 GMT
I've already said it a million times, but once more won't hurt - the referendum did not condone No Deal, so stopping No Deal is not dishonouring the referendum result. Fine distinctions are critically important, and it's astonishing how many people don't bother to think about them. Still curious about what you think the ref did and didn't condone? It is possible to chart exactly (scientifically ie a FACT) when “no deal Brexit” became a “thing”. You can look at how many google searches are done on a phrase/word to see when it came into existence. There is a good article in the Independent newspaper..... It was first searched for in the weeks before May struck her withdrawal agreement in NOV 2017 It did not begin in any substantial numbers until JULY 2018 when Johnson and Davis walked out of Government. So it is a relatively recent thing....no-one in 2016 voted for it as it was not talked about. No-one suggested the idea of leaving the EU without a deal. To think there was a time when we had never heard of words such as Brexit and Prorogue.....  |
|
2,762 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Sept 30, 2019 9:29:52 GMT
Maybe this is what people voted for. After all, it’s what the head of Vote Leave said would happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2019 21:46:53 GMT
I've already said it a million times, but once more won't hurt - the referendum did not condone No Deal, so stopping No Deal is not dishonouring the referendum result. Fine distinctions are critically important, and it's astonishing how many people don't bother to think about them. Still curious about what you think the ref did and didn't condone? Read almost any of my many posts in this thread, I've explained it many times before. The Leave campaign was not predicated on crashing out of the EU but on negotiating the exit deal that the Article 50 process is designed to achieve. And that's all completely separate from the fact that what it did or didn't condone is to a certain extent irrelevant, as it was not legally binding so it was and is still up to Parliament to decide what is in the best interests of the country. |
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 1, 2019 7:15:38 GMT
How could it be - it was a referendum. By definition referendum's are not intended to be 'legally binding'. It's like saying a decision over breakfast to go to Alton Towers or Brighton for the day is not legally binding: we know.
But 33.5 million participated in that particular ref, in the same way tens of millions participated in the two EEC referendums in the early 70s. I don't remember a boycott - the entire political class willingly participated and the national media actively engaged. All on the basis the outcome would be enacted.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Oct 1, 2019 9:21:16 GMT
Yes - on the basis the outcome would be enacted. But the 'outcome' being presented was not the situation we face now.
The outcome people voted for was £350m more a week for the NHS, 'the easiest trade deal in history', etc etc.
It was cake and unicorns.
We're not going to get that outcome. That outcome is impossible.
Again: do you give people what they voted for but actually don't want - food and medicine shortages, more problems in Northern Ireland, the disintegration of the United Kingdom. Or do you give them what you know they want, but they didn't actually vote for - the best possible economic situation for the country given the circumstances.
The fact that people voted for something doesn't mean that they can have it. Voting for unicorns doesn't force them into existence.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 1, 2019 11:19:02 GMT
Woud you describe the loss of 100,000 City jobs as a unicorn? Or, if the vote was to Leave, an immediate GDP hit of 3% as a unicorn?
Am I right in thinking every one of these appalling consequences - or unicorns - would be a potential result of inept project management; one of those large scale January 1st-type jobs, perhaps a trade version of the millennium bug or the implementation of the euro currency? |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Oct 1, 2019 13:24:50 GMT
People rolling out the Millennium Bug argument are just showing their ignorance - talk to anyone who knows anything about IT and they’ll tell you exactly why it proves the opposite of the point you think you’re making.
The general public have no idea of the complexities of these situations - and they should not need to know about them, because government should be basing their decisions on real expertise, not on dumbed-down politically-motivated messaging to the general public.
If anything has become clear over the past 3 years it’s that the Leave campaigners were basing their arguments on what would be an effective political message, and not on an actual understanding of how the E.U. and our integration with it works. Even basic things like what the Single Market and Customs Union are!
The obvious sign that this is true is the number of Brexiteers who have been placed in the position of delivering Brexit and failed signally to do so.
Honestly, it really does make me despair for the state of our political leadership.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 1, 2019 13:36:51 GMT
And unicorns? And inept project management?
|
|
5,066 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 1, 2019 17:36:46 GMT
Woud you describe the loss of 100,000 City jobs as a unicorn? Or, if the vote was to Leave, an immediate GDP hit of 3% as a unicorn?
Am I right in thinking every one of these appalling consequences - or unicorns - would be a potential result of inept project management; one of those large scale January 1st-type jobs, perhaps a trade version of the millennium bug or the implementation of the euro currency? I have worked with Signalling Systems and have done for a number of years, so therefore I work with computers that drive signalling. Nothing happened on 01/01/2000, this is because many many hours of corrective and preventative maintenance before hand happened, this in turn was exhaustively tested, to make sure my business was 'operationally prepared.' |
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 1, 2019 17:42:25 GMT
Well, that's effective project management -among other things. I won't expect a ration book to pop through the letter box just yet.
|
|
2,762 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Oct 1, 2019 18:04:58 GMT
Well, that's effective project management -among other things. I won't expect a ration book to pop through the letter box just yet. Y2K mitigation was a multi year project - I was working on it in 1997. At the moment, businesses don’t know what their regulatory regime will be at the end of the month. You’re asking a lot of project managers to learn the requirements, define their desired approach and implement it in a month. No one’s saying there will be ration books, but even the Government is now accepting that there will be disruption. Remember, the chairman of Vote Leave, Stuart Rose, said “nothing would change” on Independence Day, and there would be no “turbulence or trauma”. |
|
213 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 1, 2019 18:27:25 GMT
Post by peelee on Oct 1, 2019 18:27:25 GMT
Stuart Rose was the Chairman of Britain Stronger in Europe, corporate pro-Remainers. He was good, too, as I recall. Admitted at an early presentation to mass media that if the UK voted to Leave then wage rates for workers in Britain probably would rise. Amidst much laughter from many rank and file trades unionists amused he'd blurted out something that was part of their argument for Leaving the EU, he departed. And wage rates have indeed been rising since the Referendum vote. Fondly remembered for his honesty, though must have appalled the CBI.
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 1, 2019 18:38:48 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Oct 1, 2019 18:38:48 GMT
Well, that's effective project management -among other things. I won't expect a ration book to pop through the letter box just yet. Y2K mitigation was a multi year project - I was working on it in 1997. At the moment, businesses don’t know what their regulatory regime will be at the end of the month. You’re asking a lot of project managers to learn the requirements, define their desired approach and implement it in a month. No one’s saying there will be ration books, but even the Government is now accepting that there will be disruption. I still wonder at what was done onwards from only 2 years post Windows 95. Obv. people made a lot of money from the growing media scare narrative but, still, job.
The rationing thing was light-hearted.
|
|
754 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Oct 1, 2019 19:01:58 GMT
My husband worked for 2 years at his company to identify and plan and lead a team implementing changes to their code for year 2000 (shop audit world-wide company). He knew what he had to do, as it was a simple case of changing the date format, and his whole team finished on time, meaning the data processing on huge mainframes continued. If he hadn’t done it THE DATA WOULD HAVE GONE WRONG. The government had a publicity campaign (we all remember the millennium bug?) and companies were clearly told what to do. Current situation - no-one (Including the government) knows what is happening 30 days from possible biggest trading change in 40 years. Good luck with that....
I get really angry when people say nothing happened at Y2K ....that’s because they got it right. It is a fact that if a programme had dates in old format it would have failed. A fact. Indisputable. Not some sort of weird myth!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 19:14:11 GMT
Well, if the latest wheeze of the ‘failing and blaming’ crew is to point the finger at businesses for not being ready for something that’s been a dumpster fire for the last few years, then they are pretty much at the bottom of the barrel.
The ones enjoying this most are the two extremes, the ‘socialist utopia arising from the chaos’ group and the ‘shorting the pound and making lots of lovely money’ group.
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 1, 2019 19:40:44 GMT
Concur with the above on Y2K.
We spent 2 years identifying all the software and machine code we used, evaluated the risk, updated and validated software as necessary.
Very little happened as we were well prepared.
Back to Brexit, Interesting today was the first time I read that No-Deal was the last thing that the Conservatives wanted from the start, a Deal would never silence the Brexiteers and therefore had to force it to make a Benn Act or similar occur to stop Brexit from happening at all before an election.
The issues around No-Deal would be difficult from a Political perspective, any shortages / impacts would be directly attributed with Johnson and Co and likely to make them unelectable.
With this strategy they can transfer the blame, kick the can down the road and go into an election as victims making it all about Brexit.
As a strategy it is valid and maybe best explains the cul-de-sac they appear to have driven themselves into but fraught with pitfalls as a lot of the parameters outside of direct control.
The performance of Johnson is the weak link, polls are beginning to show a lot of key voters are now associating him with incompetence and If the election is fought away from the Brexit battlefield it will be easy to dismiss the investments being made as only cancelling the austerity cuts and the 130,000 deaths (not sure if true but in the public domain) due to austerity are hard to defend.
The proof in the pudding will be around how the extension is managed and maybe the reluctance by the opposition for a GNU (Government of National Unity) is to force the Conservatives to request the extension and hammering home that Johnson is a failure and he couldn’t carry out his promise. Excuses are always a weak form of defence.
If a GNU is forced their best strategy is to hold a referendum before a General Election which is beginning to gain traction, the Conservatives would find it hard to win a post Brexit election.
Really enjoying Politics at the moment, the twist and turns are extremely entertaining and mentally stimulating.
No numbers in this one, only thoughts on the current state of play.
|
|
2,762 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Oct 1, 2019 20:53:08 GMT
I still wonder at what was done onwards from only 2 years post Windows 95. Obv. people made a lot of money from the growing media scare narrative but, still, job.
The rationing thing was light-hearted.
Oddly enough, international investment banks don’t run their core accounting systems on Windows. I was working on systems that had been written in COBOL and PL/1 ten or fifteen years earlier, when people had assumed that they would be replaced by 2000 so they used six-character date fields (hence a calculation of elapsed time between 311299 and 010100 would have gone wrong). But hey, details. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 21:15:34 GMT
Johnson’s final offer.
Short version - not likely to shift either the EU, Northern Ireland, Brexiters, Remainers or, probably, anyone in between. Who on earth is this supposed to convince?
Even shorter version - Game over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2019 3:59:00 GMT
Johnson’s final offer. [...] Who on earth is this supposed to convince? His supporters. It seems to me that Johnson's whole "thing" is to play the thwarted hero. His plans won't work and are never intended to. They're intended to get shot down by someone that Johnson can then paint as an enemy hell bent on destroying his great vision. |
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 2, 2019 8:24:59 GMT
What are the spending 'pledges' so far - £40-£50 billion plus min wage to £10.50 (in X years): northern Crossrail, £15 bill NHS, £billions for state schools, road infrastructure, etc. He is planning for an imminent election - after which he will either be out of office and so the pledges are irrelevant, or there will be unexpected economic conditions which require a revision of the proposed investments. Pretty much infantile-level bluster.
|
|
