http://www.alexanderboot.com/junk-goes-dutch/ "As a lifetime student of language, I pay attention to how people use figures of speech, such as similes or analogies. My observation is that, when they search for a telling comparison by way of illustration, the first thing that springs to their mind is something from their areas of expertise. Thus, speaking of someone making a mistake, a musician is likely to say “he struck a false note”. A football coach, on the other hand, would probably opt for “he missed a sitter from five yards”, whereas a physician would probably prefer “he misdiagnosed the condition”. The upshot of it is that the language people use gives a clue to their personality, experience and the kind of things they hold dear. That’s why I find so elucidating what Jean-Claude Juncker (Junk to his friends) said about Brexit the other day. Fair’s fair, he explained. You’ve got to pay the bill before leaving. That was the message, and it’s straightforward enough. But the way Junk worded this perfectly sound idea caught my eye: “If you are sitting in a bar and ordering 28 beers and then suddenly one of your colleagues is leaving and is not paying, that is not feasible. They have to pay.” Now, having drunk enough booze with Junk to float an aircraft carrier, I know he likes his jar. Usually his tipple of choice is single malt whisky, but he often perpetrates an indignity on that noble beverage by chasing it with a stein or two. However, he doesn’t seem to be familiar with bar etiquette, which isn’t surprising. After all, Junk has spent most of his life on an expense account, so I don’t think he has ever been out of pocket when sinking toxic amounts of booze. As a close friend, I don’t mind plugging this hole in his education. Junk is referring to the situation of every drinker paying his share of the bill, or going Dutch as we say. That’s a fairly widespread arrangement, but not the only one. For example, when I was a board director, I’d occasionally take my whole department out for a drink or lunch and pick up the whole tab afterwards. I’d then claim the amount on expenses, which is an arrangement Junk knows only too well. On other occasions, I or a generous friend would buy a round of drinks for everybody present. The implicit understanding under such circumstances is that what goes around comes around: you pay today, I’ll pay next time, that sort of thing. Now, true enough, sometimes people do go Dutch. If they all have drunk roughly the same amount, they divide the bill by the number of people, and each pays his share. If, on the other hand, one of the drinkers is Junk, his fair share would be more than all the others’ combined, for obvious reasons. Now the analogy Junk used involves 28 drinkers sinking beers in a bar and going Dutch. For the analogy to work, each should pay 1/28th of the bill. However, Britain has been paying at least twice her fair share since the EU was formed in 1992 (having retroactively prevented every European war that could have broken out before). That means the drinks of one of the 28 are on us. But hey, we’re wealthier than, say, Romania, so we can afford it. By all means, let’s tell Romania to keep her wallet in her pocket. But Junk isn’t just talking about Britain paying 1/14th of the bill today. He seems to want us to keep paying for the drinks the others will be consuming without us long after we’re gone. In other words, he isn’t talking about going Dutch. We must coin another term to describe what he has in mind. May I suggest going EU? ‘Going EU’ isn’t at all like going Dutch – Junk’s analogy doesn’t work. ‘Going EU’ is more akin to a slave buying himself out of servitude. This is such a rare event that no going rate exists, and each slave pays for his freedom whatever price the master sets. Or perhaps even that analogy is wanting. For the EU is demanding that the slave pay large amounts before the master even agrees to talk about the terms of his release. “I’m not in a revenge mood. I’m not hating the British,” explained Junk. In fact, he quite likes us: “The Europeans have to be grateful for so many things Britain has brought to Europe, during war, after war, before war, everywhere and every time.” That’s very good of him: if there’s one thing I hate, it’s ingratitude. But then came the clincher: “BUT YOU HAVE TO PAY!!!” Junk positively sounds like a tricky boozer who always claims to have left his wallet at home when the bill arrives. Okay, forget drinking (Junk never does). Let’s go back to another analogy he favours, that of a divorce settlement. I don’t know how many divorces Junk has been through, and on what grounds (him coming home every night pissed as a skunk?), but they don’t work that way either. The two parties, or rather their lawyers, sit down and hold talks. As a result, one party (usually the husband) agrees to part with some part of his estate. Junk, on the other hand, is demanding a vast amount as a precondition for even opening the talks. Otherwise, he says, “We cannot find for the time being a real compromise as far as the remaining financial commitments of the UK are concerned.” I’m eager to help, as I always am every time Junk can’t get home under his own steam after a night out. The real compromise is that we exit, bang the door and leave Junk stuck with the bill. Or rather we’ve already paid, by financing Junk’s wicked employer disproportionately for decades. Londoners pronounce this word like ‘dickheads’. And Junk? Don’t mention the war, there’s a good lad. Your German masters don’t like it"...
Czech elections are taking place also this week and the leading candidate is also like the Austrian new leader, a euro sceptic. It will be an interesting week this week for the eu http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nt-billionaire-leads-race-become-czech-prime/
Theresa will sort them out over dinner, assisted by a few bottles of bubbly, she will get exactly what she wants, hard as nails remember, better no deal then a bad deal, what a laugh, a big part of the cabinet needs replacing with some people who are not susceptible to black mail but tells them to go walkies, I like to see how German manufacturers like WTO rules!
There's a rumour Micheal Gove is being considered for Chancellor when Hammond is sacked. I hope its true.
Can't say I'm a fan of Mr Gove either, surely there are some fresh faces hidden some where in possession of a bit of backbone?
Whoever the Chancellor is, he will do well to replace the £490 billion that has gone missing. Money is leaving the UK by the boat load. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...lions-revised-figures-reveal-uk-490bn-poorer/
Gove certainly has backbone, and brass neck as well which in politics is probably no bad thing. I don't care about his personality nor his conduct in the Boris leadership debacle. The important thing is he's proved himself a thoroughly competent minister with sound free-market principles who is full of ideas and energy. He's someone who instincts are right and he gets things done.
To be honest I think many of the existing big beast's as they call them, will probably be faded out after brexit. They will look for shiney new people so to prepare for the next election. Imagine timing that just as we hit an impass in the talks and most now believe we will have no deal but go to wto, project fear is still alive my friend even more so, as most of that loss (it rarely is an actual loss) has occured by currency speculators on the pound. But something the most ardent remoaners fail to understand, most brexiteers understood a few years of financial low level growth for exchange to return democracy which the eu hates. It's fair to say as proven by recent elections, more countries are looking at leaving if the eu doesn't take in what is going on around them. Nobody but the sheep wants a superstate. The next place for independence, Canvey island https://www.theguardian.com/politic...island-independent-party-thames-estuary-essex
Heres something that might cheer you all up this morning, a thoroughly self important piece by Alastair Campbell. Please do try to keep a straight face though whilst reading the paragraph I've copied and pasted below, I'm sure he tried his very very best “Third, I want to explain why I have been trying so hard to deliver the Brexit the people voted for. It was a close result. But leave won. I felt strongly that it was my duty to deliver the only Brexit that I believed could meet the demands of the majority of leavers – out of the single market and the customs union, out of the European court of justice.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/16/theresa-may-brexit-cant-be-done
Campbell relies on eu cheques since no one in U.K. politics want's him. Still his true to his colours, just like Clegg, those colours are those of a cock. The meal last night with junker brought back a memory, see if this rings a bell? British Prime Minister goes to europe and says, look guys, we are a democratic country that has democratic votes and unless you give me something, then our time being a partner of any kind with the eu could change forever, give me something I can take back to help both of us out. Was it (a) David Cameron, (b) Theresa May or (c) both of the above? Last night the meal gave us "accelerate" but the real decision will be made on Thursday/Friday when the 27 other countries meet, that should see a move or none. Effectively unless we have moved forward by the end of December then no deal is likely. I do wish the honesty from the eu had been there at the beginning and simply said, if you leave the eu, there will be no deals, both sides will revert to wto.
Pontificating hangers-on like Campbell should be forced to stand for election,and their own statements used as the manifesto. I imagine they choose their careers knowing that bigotry and narrow-mindedness will never give them a pass into the Commons,so bending the ears as an unqualified and hypocritical political adviser is their only way to get their snouts into the taxpayers pocket without the downside of having to ask for permission first. The Grauniad has the lowest circulation of the so-called quality papers,(sad that it's views are shared by the arch-propagandists at the BBC).I think that in itself speaks volumes for his popularity as a "Journalist".
I think he steals those copies of the times from the library free papers. No real Times readers would show their paper looking like it was a tramps quilt as chuckles does.
So Brexitards explain why EVERYONE else is wrong and you are right. No one else thinks Brexit has any positives. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...se-uk-europe-theresa-may-latest-a8004676.html
Would this be the same OECD, a French organisation and intrinsic component of the European Project, that was founded in 1957 after the Treaty of Rome to promote the foundation of the European Economic Community (the EEC) and has marched in close step ever since pushing every European treaty and offering unequivocal support for European integration, the expansion of the EU and ever closer union? What were you expecting them to say and why would you expect our knees to knock at their propaganda or that we should take it seriously? Such a grouping might constitute "everyone" in your closed and gloomy world Dookie, but up here on planet reality we understand that the world is vastly bigger than you can possibly comprehend and we don't need any of the innumerable departmental off-shoots of imperial Project-Europe's ruling politburo to interpret world events on our behalf or tell us how to think or how to vote. Get some counselling and learn to accept that there isn't going to be another referendum and even if there were the majority for leave would be substantially larger. You are going to have to come to terms with the fact that the dystopian authoritarian experiment your love so much is going to die. We know it and they know it. They're getting desperate and it shows.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/17/remainers-brexit-eu-leave Remain voters hypocritical? Surely not. They've always draped themselves in the beloved flag haven't they? I'm sorry but the more this goes on the more I see of the 'EU project' and it's leaders I don't like. It's as plain as day that they're only bothered about the UK's monetary contribution, you can point the finger at the UK negotiations team all you want, but it's the EU that is stalling as a negotiation tactic. As soon as it starts to look more likely that it's a 'no deal' (whatever that means) then out comes a little more project fear (OECD) or the EU team denies they're at fault (Barnier) Starting with the negotiation teams, You don't have to like any of the Tories, or indeed any of the UK negotiation team, personally I'm not a huge fan of any current politicians, but hats off to David Davis who in my view should continue with his more recent honest outbursts as opposed to being so bloody polite. "Michel Barnier today rejected British accusations that the EU was delaying Brexit negotiations to extort more money from Britain and insisted he had been ready to speed up talks for weeks. Earlier today David Davis accused the EU of dragging its feet to drive up the price of Brexit: “They are using time pressure to get more money out of us. Bluntly that’s what is going on. It's obvious to anybody,” the Brexit Secretary said in the House of Commons. “We don’t have any intention of holding up any process whatsoever,” Mr Barnier said at a press conference in Luxembourg, “The EU is not holding anything or anybody back. We are ready and willing to even speed up the negotiation.” yep, sure thing Mr Barnier Then you have this OECD report talking down the prospect of growth in the UK under a no deal scenario, although conveniently avoiding the impact of a 'no deal' for some of its other larger members. If a 'no deal' is so bad for the UK, then surely by default it would be too for some of our 'current' larger suppliers (Germany et al) I'm sorry but the whole thing reeks of fear mongering and unhinged hypocrisy by many in the UK. The sooner we move to WTO the better, just get on with it and then we'll see won't we.
The OECD has an unrivaled record (pretty much a 100% record) in issuing economic predictions which turn out to be not just inaccurate but utterly wrong. As a general rule, whatever the highly partisan and politicised OECD says will happen, you are safe to bet good money on the opposite outcome. Few organisations have been so consistently wrong-headed. If the OECD says Brexit will be a disaster for the UK, that amounts to a gold-plated endorsement and a clear sign that we were right all along and we should get it concluded as soon as possible without further pointless "negotiating".
