Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Hammond blames Brexit for Tory election failure"
Had you down as accountancy type maybe SAP or PA definitely not scientific type, now with the "love" bit on the end of that statement more leaning on a shovel type while posting on a smartphone.
I've a lot of time for Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, but in that article (as much of it I could read without paying!) he misses a massive point that invalidates his whole idea of an orderly Brexit over several or many years: Most MPs and MSM media outlets (such as the BBC), now and probably for the foreseeable future, are against Brexit and will be fighting ceaselessly to undermine and dilute it.
So now, because of a combination of political misjudgements (e.g. by Cameron) and good luck, we have an opportunity for a complete Brexit we should go at it hammer and tongs and get the damned thing done decisively, contrary to what he claims.
I've a lot of time for Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, but in that article (as much of it I could read without paying!) he misses a massive point that invalidates his whole idea of an orderly Brexit over several or many years: Most MPs and MSM media outlets (such as the BBC), now and probably for the foreseeable future, are against Brexit and will be fighting ceaselessly to undermine and dilute it.
So now, because of a combination of political misjudgements (e.g. by Cameron) and good luck, we have an opportunity for a complete Brexit we should go at it hammer and tongs and get the damned thing done decisively, contrary to what he claims.
That's what the government was trying to do, but the General election has torpedo'd their plan. Remain Tories deserted the party. There will be another election and if the economy tanks that means a Labour government. If you read their manifesto they are not committed to a Hard Brexit, and further more they probably won't get a majority so it will be a "coalition of chaos" they will have to call a second referendum, an SNP and Lib Dem demand. In the midst of an economic downturn that will basically destroy Brexit.
The only hope to get a Brexit is for the Hard Brexiteers to reach out to Remain Tories. That doesn't look like it will happen because they can't accept the GE result, which rejected Hard Brexit.
I've a lot of time for Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, but in that article (as much of it I could read without paying!) he misses a massive point that invalidates his whole idea of an orderly Brexit over several or many years: Most MPs and MSM media outlets (such as the BBC), now and probably for the foreseeable future, are against Brexit and will be fighting ceaselessly to undermine and dilute it.
So now, because of a combination of political misjudgements (e.g. by Cameron) and good luck, we have an opportunity for a complete Brexit we should go at it hammer and tongs and get the damned thing done decisively, contrary to what he claims.
I'm actually quite chuffed that you think I'm a "thick, ignorant cretin" because that's how you seem to describe anyone who doesn't share your views, particularly about the EU. Are you scared you might be wrong?
No I describe thick, ignorant cretins as thick, ignorant cretins whether or not they happen to share my views.
Had you down as accountancy type maybe SAP or PA definitely not scientific type, now with the "love" bit on the end of that statement more leaning on a shovel type while posting on a smartphone.
He's certainly not a business type given how he got completed shafted by his agent.
No, fair point; cretin-status is more of an "unattainable aspiration" in your case, love.
Had you down as accountancy type maybe SAP or PA definitely not scientific type, now with the "love" bit on the end of that statement more leaning on a shovel type while posting on a smartphone.
Why is it that you take pride in showing what a thick, ignorant cretin you are?
Genuinely interested in the answer.
It's hardly ignorant to conclude that the cat is always dead, either by the radiation or the poison. If it's the radiation, the cat will appear to be alive, depending on when the box is opened, as death by radiation poisoning is a more gradual process. It's pointless to theorise on cat behaviour, as Beansey has recently demonstrated.
Anyway, to summarise, introducing Schrodinger's Theory into the Brexit discussion is utterly cretinous (to borrow your term).
I take pride in very little, pride is a bit too much of a subjective concept, but that's probably a discussion for another thread (or day).
I'm actually quite chuffed that you think I'm a "thick, ignorant cretin" because that's how you seem to describe anyone who doesn't share your views, particularly about the EU. Are you scared you might be wrong?
Leave a comment: