Planet Rugby Forum

If there’s one group of European society the EU supports it’s the bankers.

bimboman wrote:If there’s one group of European society the EU supports it’s the bankers.

Shut up Jezza

SamShark wrote:Jez tweeted this last night:

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
I will do everything I can to stop a no-deal bankers’ Brexit.

I can't believe this is just off the cuff so why did he/his people say "bankers" Brexit.

Which bank or banker supports Brexit?

Yes there are some spivvy speculators who want to cash in, but this populist blame game is odd.

Although Mogg and his ilk believe some "bankers" are negative remainers talking Britain down, so I guess Corbyn may as well get stuck in too.

Aaron Banks ?

SamShark wrote:Jez tweeted this last night:

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
I will do everything I can to stop a no-deal bankers’ Brexit.

I can't believe this is just off the cuff so why did he/his people say "bankers" Brexit.

Which bank or banker supports Brexit?

Yes there are some spivvy speculators who want to cash in, but this populist blame game is odd.

Although Mogg and his ilk believe some "bankers" are negative remainers talking Britain down, so I guess Corbyn may as well get stuck in too.

perhaps he meant to say wankers' but autocorrect changed it to bankers?

Sandstorm wrote:

bimboman wrote:If there’s one group of European society the EU supports it’s the bankers.

Shut up Jezza

sturginho wrote:

SamShark wrote:Jez tweeted this last night:

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
I will do everything I can to stop a no-deal bankers’ Brexit.

I can't believe this is just off the cuff so why did he/his people say "bankers" Brexit.

Which bank or banker supports Brexit?

Yes there are some spivvy speculators who want to cash in, but this populist blame game is odd.

Although Mogg and his ilk believe some "bankers" are negative remainers talking Britain down, so I guess Corbyn may as well get stuck in too.

perhaps he meant to say wankers' but autocorrect changed it to bankers?

My opinion of Corbyn would have been enhanced if he had gone with "wankers"

SamShark wrote:

sturginho wrote:

SamShark wrote:Jez tweeted this last night:

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
I will do everything I can to stop a no-deal bankers’ Brexit.

I can't believe this is just off the cuff so why did he/his people say "bankers" Brexit.

Which bank or banker supports Brexit?

Yes there are some spivvy speculators who want to cash in, but this populist blame game is odd.

Although Mogg and his ilk believe some "bankers" are negative remainers talking Britain down, so I guess Corbyn may as well get stuck in too.

perhaps he meant to say wankers' but autocorrect changed it to bankers?

My opinion of Corbyn would have been enhanced if he had gone with "wankers"

@Jeremycorbynwanker

Speaking of blaming bankers for things, one of my favourite ever Corbyn tweets is where he scapegoats bankers, employers and the Tories, then says we shouldn't scapegoat.

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
May 9
It wasn’t nurses who crashed our economy: it was bankers.

It wasn’t immigrants who caused the biggest squeeze on wages since 1815: it was bad employers.

It wasn’t the EU that cut public services to give tax cuts to the rich: it was the Tories.

We need solutions, not scapegoats

This bankers thing has now become the story.

Why are these politicians playing to a tiny base of supporters - it makes no sense.

If you know very well that you aren't well trusted by the general population, because many people think you will unleash ideological punitive policies on business or "bankers", why prove them right whilst gaining no strategic benefit in exchange.

SamShark wrote:This bankers thing has now become the story.

Why are these politicians playing to a tiny base of supporters - it makes no sense.

If you know very well that you aren't well trusted by the general population, because many people think you will unleash ideological punitive policies on business or "bankers", why prove them right whilst gaining no strategic benefit in exchange.

Because politics today is so often about appealing to your base which is why our system and those across the west are deeply polarised.

SamShark wrote:This bankers thing has now become the story.

Why are these politicians playing to a tiny base of supporters - it makes no sense.

If you know very well that you aren't well trusted by the general population, because many people think you will unleash ideological punitive policies on business or "bankers", why prove them right whilst gaining no strategic benefit in exchange.

Because the Tories don't have exclusive rights to thickos ?

Gospel wrote:

SamShark wrote:This bankers thing has now become the story.

Why are these politicians playing to a tiny base of supporters - it makes no sense.

If you know very well that you aren't well trusted by the general population, because many people think you will unleash ideological punitive policies on business or "bankers", why prove them right whilst gaining no strategic benefit in exchange.

Because politics today is so often about appealing to your base which is why our system and those across the west are deeply polarised.

It has to be based on some sort of strategy though surely.

It horrifies me to see Boris stuffing his cabinet with Brexiteers and his team with leave campaigners, then running effectively an election campaign to woo Brexit Party voters with policies they will like.

But he doesn't care what horrifies, me as he needs traditional Tories and Brexit party voters and to scrape a majority so he can offload the DUP.

Corbyn is playing catch up massively in popularity terms, Labour is behind in the polls. Playing to his base will ensure he fails. I think there's certainly mileage in pretending everything is an elite conspiracy but his opponents are doing that more loudly and effectively.

Maybe he doesn't care - I have no idea what he's playing at.

SamShark wrote:It horrifies me to see Boris stuffing his cabinet with Brexiteers and his team with leave campaigners, then running effectively an election campaign to woo Brexit Party voters with policies they will like.

But he doesn't care what horrifies, me as he needs traditional Tories and Brexit party voters and to scrape a majority so he can offload the DUP.

Brexit was a binary decision and as such it has polarised opinion. May arguably tried the compromise route and look how that turned out. Corbyn's bedsit Leninism is something else altogether.

c69 wrote:Farage having a real go at Boris now.

Was always going to happen. Once he loses his MEP seat he is off the Gravy train (other than the Banks train that is)

Gospel wrote:

SamShark wrote:It horrifies me to see Boris stuffing his cabinet with Brexiteers and his team with leave campaigners, then running effectively an election campaign to woo Brexit Party voters with policies they will like.

But he doesn't care what horrifies, me as he needs traditional Tories and Brexit party voters and to scrape a majority so he can offload the DUP.

Brexit was a binary decision and as such it has polarised opinion. May arguably tried the compromise route and look how that turned out. Corbyn's bedsit Leninism is something else altogether.

f**king PR, I read that as Corbyn's sitinbed Lemsipism and it almost made sense.

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

slick wrote:

Gospel wrote:

SamShark wrote:It horrifies me to see Boris stuffing his cabinet with Brexiteers and his team with leave campaigners, then running effectively an election campaign to woo Brexit Party voters with policies they will like.

But he doesn't care what horrifies, me as he needs traditional Tories and Brexit party voters and to scrape a majority so he can offload the DUP.

Brexit was a binary decision and as such it has polarised opinion. May arguably tried the compromise route and look how that turned out. Corbyn's bedsit Leninism is something else altogether.

f**king PR, I read that as Corbyn's sitinbed Lemsipism and it almost made sense.

no almost about it...!

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

At this point, I'm assuming the UK will leave the EU with nothing agreed between the parties. I'm not assuming the UK will refuse to pay its post-Brexit bills to the UK but I'm accepting it as a possibility.

That said, if the UK's response to EU invoices is go and get fúcked, then yeah this would become an issue affecting all of the UK's dealings with the EU. (Which is why I believe the UK will offer the UE much less than the EU would like but just enough to make it impractical for the EU to use 'indebtedness' as an effective bargaining ploy with the UK in post-Brexit negotiations).

MungoMan wrote:

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

At this point, I'm assuming the UK will leave the EU with nothing agreed between the parties. I'm not assuming the UK will refuse to pay its post-Brexit bills to the UK but I'm accepting it as a possibility.

That said, if the UK's response to EU invoices is go and get fúcked, then yeah this would become an issue affecting all of the UK's dealings with the EU. (Which is why I believe the UK will offer the UE much less than the EU would like but just enough to make it impractical for the EU to use 'indebtedness' as an effective bargaining ploy with the UK in post-Brexit negotiations).

Johnson claimed yesterday that leaving with no deal meant not paying the £39bn

bessantj wrote:Has this been posted before?

Dear christ, cheddar cheese and Guinness.

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

MungoMan wrote:

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

At this point, I'm assuming the UK will leave the EU with nothing agreed between the parties. I'm not assuming the UK will refuse to pay its post-Brexit bills to the UK but I'm accepting it as a possibility.

That said, if the UK's response to EU invoices is go and get fúcked, then yeah this would become an issue affecting all of the UK's dealings with the EU. (Which is why I believe the UK will offer the UE much less than the EU would like but just enough to make it impractical for the EU to use 'indebtedness' as an effective bargaining ploy with the UK in post-Brexit negotiations).

Johnson claimed yesterday that leaving with no deal meant not paying the £39bn

I saw that, yes. And afforded it the credibility it merited.

If the UK were to pay zero towards 'debts' already accrued, that would ratfúck any and all subsequent negotiations with the EU. Which I why I believe the UK will offer somethintg along the lines of a figleaf amount.

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

Well said.

May suddenly tried to compromise right at the end, but by that stage everyone knew guarantees on workers rights etc would just be torn up by a more right wing leader.

Her tactics otherwise, from the start, were "Brexit means Brexit", get out of the SM, out of the CU, no payments, end free movement and so on.

Nobody knows the answer to this as every "compromise" enrages someone but it would be interesting to wind back the clock and see what would have happened if she went with "It was 52/48 which means we have to leave, but stay closely aligned" and pursued a Common Market 2.0 style Brexit.

It goes without saying that the ERG would have had a tantrum - as they did anyway and would do in response to everything - but millions of remainers may have shrugged and felt they could get behind it.

She created and endorsed the "no deal is better than a bad deal" line, back in the days when people hadn't shifted to the extremes of "no deal" as a first preference vs revoke the whole shit show.

SamShark wrote:

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

Well said.

May suddenly tried to compromise right at the end, but by that stage everyone knew guarantees on workers rights etc would just be torn up by a more right wing leader.

Her tactics otherwise, from the start, were "Brexit means Brexit", get out of the SM, out of the CU, no payments, end free movement and so on.

Nobody knows the answer to this as every "compromise" enrages someone but it would be interesting to wind back the clock and see what would have happened if she went with "It was 52/48 which means we have to leave, but stay closely aligned" and pursued a Common Market 2.0 style Brexit.

It goes without saying that the ERG would have had a tantrum - as they did anyway and would do in response to everything - but millions of remainers may have shrugged and felt they could get behind it.

She created and endorsed the "no deal is better than a bad deal" line, back in the days when people hadn't shifted to the extremes of "no deal" as a first preference vs revoke the whole shit show.

It did rather seem May was obsessed with migrants after her time in the home office, and that drove her sense of zeal almost as much as putting the Tory party before country, and the more one learns about how the policies undertaken in her time as Home Secretary continue to ruin lives it becomes ever less edifying

slick wrote:

Gospel wrote:

SamShark wrote:It horrifies me to see Boris stuffing his cabinet with Brexiteers and his team with leave campaigners, then running effectively an election campaign to woo Brexit Party voters with policies they will like.

But he doesn't care what horrifies, me as he needs traditional Tories and Brexit party voters and to scrape a majority so he can offload the DUP.

Brexit was a binary decision and as such it has polarised opinion. May arguably tried the compromise route and look how that turned out. Corbyn's bedsit Leninism is something else altogether.

f**king PR, I read that as Corbyn's sitinbed Lemsipism and it almost made sense.

It really does.

c69 wrote:Seemingly the opposition group have an agreemnt regarding tactics.
Extend article 50 by legislative measures.

That'll help to resolve the impasse. Just keep kicking the can until Piquant and his mates have killed off enough old people to swing a second vote.

+1

SamShark wrote:

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

Well said.

May suddenly tried to compromise right at the end, but by that stage everyone knew guarantees on workers rights etc would just be torn up by a more right wing leader.

Her tactics otherwise, from the start, were "Brexit means Brexit", get out of the SM, out of the CU, no payments, end free movement and so on.

Nobody knows the answer to this as every "compromise" enrages someone but it would be interesting to wind back the clock and see what would have happened if she went with "It was 52/48 which means we have to leave, but stay closely aligned" and pursued a Common Market 2.0 style Brexit.

It goes without saying that the ERG would have had a tantrum - as they did anyway and would do in response to everything - but millions of remainers may have shrugged and felt they could get behind it.

She created and endorsed the "no deal is better than a bad deal" line, back in the days when people hadn't shifted to the extremes of "no deal" as a first preference vs revoke the whole shit show.

May compromised within the remit of leaving the European Union.

Gospel wrote:

SamShark wrote:

Plastic Sarrie wrote:

May arguably tried the compromise route

Did she fudge.

A compromise route would probably have been something like staying in the single market and customs union - I'm pretty sure that would have got over the line in parliament, but May decided that she didn't want to get cross party support - Tory unity was more important than getting any deal through.

The fundamental issue is that the hardliners of the ERG will never, ever be satisfied, and the likes of Farage have helped whip c20+% of the population into believing that the only true Brexit is no deal, as if everything happens in a vacuum, and that by, say, reneging on agreed debts with the EU, this won't become an issue further down the line.

Well said.

May suddenly tried to compromise right at the end, but by that stage everyone knew guarantees on workers rights etc would just be torn up by a more right wing leader.

Her tactics otherwise, from the start, were "Brexit means Brexit", get out of the SM, out of the CU, no payments, end free movement and so on.

Nobody knows the answer to this as every "compromise" enrages someone but it would be interesting to wind back the clock and see what would have happened if she went with "It was 52/48 which means we have to leave, but stay closely aligned" and pursued a Common Market 2.0 style Brexit.

It goes without saying that the ERG would have had a tantrum - as they did anyway and would do in response to everything - but millions of remainers may have shrugged and felt they could get behind it.

She created and endorsed the "no deal is better than a bad deal" line, back in the days when people hadn't shifted to the extremes of "no deal" as a first preference vs revoke the whole shit show.

May compromised within the remit of leaving the European Union.

What remit would that be? LEAVE MEANS LEAVE! I presume?

sewa wrote:

bessantj wrote:Has this been posted before?

Dear christ, cheddar cheese and Guinness.

What goats are 'going over the border' ?.......Ahhhh....goods. Shared language my bollocks.

Nothing necessarily new here, but hopefully this holds and they don't all start briefing against each other.

Opposition MPs say they have agreed to try to block a no-deal Brexit by passing legislation in Parliament.

A meeting between those opposed to no deal was called by Jeremy Corbyn.

A joint statement afterwards did not detail how or when legislative attempts would be made, but Green MP Caroline Lucas said it was the best way to stop a PM "careering towards" no deal.

The statement also said using a vote of no confidence to bring down the government remained an option.

The UK is set to leave the EU by 31 October and Boris Johnson has promised to stick to that date even if he cannot agree a deal with Brussels.

Ms Lucas said "the legislative way forward" was "the most secure way to try to extend Article 50, to get rid of that 31 October deadline".

Gospel wrote:

c69 wrote:Seemingly the opposition group have an agreemnt regarding tactics.
Extend article 50 by legislative measures.

That'll help to resolve the impasse. Just keep kicking the can until Piquant and his mates have killed off enough old people to swing a second vote.

Polls suggest, and have done for quite a while, that remain would win in a second vote, this isn't new.

And it isn't just through old people dying.

SamShark wrote:Speaking of blaming bankers for things, one of my favourite ever Corbyn tweets is where he scapegoats bankers, employers and the Tories, then says we shouldn't scapegoat.

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
May 9
It wasn’t nurses who crashed our economy: it was bankers.

It wasn’t immigrants who caused the biggest squeeze on wages since 1815: it was bad employers.

It wasn’t the EU that cut public services to give tax cuts to the rich: it was the Tories.

We need solutions, not scapegoats

clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right....

Also amazing how brexiteers said a narrow 52-48% remain win lead to a second referendum but are steadfastly against the idea with the shoe on the other foot.

rfurlong wrote:

SamShark wrote:Speaking of blaming bankers for things, one of my favourite ever Corbyn tweets is where he scapegoats bankers, employers and the Tories, then says we shouldn't scapegoat.

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
May 9
It wasn’t nurses who crashed our economy: it was bankers.

It wasn’t immigrants who caused the biggest squeeze on wages since 1815: it was bad employers.

It wasn’t the EU that cut public services to give tax cuts to the rich: it was the Tories.

We need solutions, not scapegoats

clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right....

Where's the lie in that though? For it to be a scape goat there would have to be incorrectly apportioned blame.

SamShark wrote:Nothing necessarily new here, but hopefully this holds and they don't all start briefing against each other.

Opposition MPs say they have agreed to try to block a no-deal Brexit by passing legislation in Parliament.

A meeting between those opposed to no deal was called by Jeremy Corbyn.

A joint statement afterwards did not detail how or when legislative attempts would be made, but Green MP Caroline Lucas said it was the best way to stop a PM "careering towards" no deal.

The statement also said using a vote of no confidence to bring down the government remained an option.

The UK is set to leave the EU by 31 October and Boris Johnson has promised to stick to that date even if he cannot agree a deal with Brussels.

Ms Lucas said "the legislative way forward" was "the most secure way to try to extend Article 50, to get rid of that 31 October deadline".

My favourite ones are where he calls bloodlibellers and holocaust deniers comrades, great friends and voices that need to be heard.

unseenwork wrote:

rfurlong wrote:

SamShark wrote:Speaking of blaming bankers for things, one of my favourite ever Corbyn tweets is where he scapegoats bankers, employers and the Tories, then says we shouldn't scapegoat.

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
May 9
It wasn’t nurses who crashed our economy: it was bankers.

It wasn’t immigrants who caused the biggest squeeze on wages since 1815: it was bad employers.

It wasn’t the EU that cut public services to give tax cuts to the rich: it was the Tories.

We need solutions, not scapegoats

clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right....

Where's the lie in that though? For it to be a scape goat there would have to be incorrectly apportioned blame.

Shush now the centrist "silent majority" are attacking the "commies" again. Just like the fash boys are brainwashing them to do.

AND-y wrote:

unseenwork wrote:

rfurlong wrote:

SamShark wrote:Speaking of blaming bankers for things, one of my favourite ever Corbyn tweets is where he scapegoats bankers, employers and the Tories, then says we shouldn't scapegoat.

Jeremy Corbyn
@jeremycorbyn
May 9
It wasn’t nurses who crashed our economy: it was bankers.

It wasn’t immigrants who caused the biggest squeeze on wages since 1815: it was bad employers.

It wasn’t the EU that cut public services to give tax cuts to the rich: it was the Tories.

We need solutions, not scapegoats

clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right....

Where's the lie in that though? For it to be a scape goat there would have to be incorrectly apportioned blame.

Shush now the centrist "silent majority" are attacking the "commies" again. Just like the fash boys are brainwashing them to do.

God they really do play Liberals like a fiddle.

earl the beaver wrote:

Gospel wrote:

c69 wrote:Seemingly the opposition group have an agreemnt regarding tactics.
Extend article 50 by legislative measures.

That'll help to resolve the impasse. Just keep kicking the can until Piquant and his mates have killed off enough old people to swing a second vote.

Polls suggest, and have done for quite a while, that remain would win in a second vote, this isn't new.

And it isn't just through old people dying.

Polls suggest it’s hardly moved.