£23 million a day? Bargain!

(That was supposed to be sarcastic, but you probably think it is a bargain. )

You might want to read this

https://fullfact.org/europe/ask-full...e-and-economy/

Thanks for the invite, but people giving me "high sixes" tends to freak me out.



People bragging about, and parading their ignorance and gullibility in public is a weird phenomenon, it has to be said.

Can someone translate this please? I can't figure out how they are making this 'impact on the economy' thing work exactly the same way if it is positive or negative. Does this mean a positive impact would cost more than the membership fee saving in the same way that a negative impact would cost more than the membership fee or have they gone overboard in their quest for equivocality?

Either there's a negative impact which is mitigated by the saving on the membership fee, or there is a positive impact enhanced by the saving on the membership fee, with the mitigation or enhancement being anywhere between from significant all the way down to barely noticeable?

Or are they saying the membership fee is such miniscule small change it shouldn't be in the equation at all?

Basically it is down to which set of "experts" you choose to believe.

They all agree that the effect on the economy is likely to be far more than the 0.3% of GDP that we pay to the EU. The leave supporters focus on the Institute of Economic Affairs who claim we will better of outside the EU due to things like "less regulation" without, as far as I can see, explaining what they mean by "less regulation" which could quite easily be a reduction in employment rights, consumer rights etc.

Remain argue that access to the free market earns us far more than we pay in.

So the membership fee is such miniscule small change it shouldn't be in the equation at all?

Wait, hang on :
Access, not membership? So what's the access fee once we aren't members any more and therefore don't have membership fees? Presumably the fees are listed on the noticeboard somewhere...

Can't stand Corbyn, as many of my posts make expressly clear. His mandate is, as you correctly imply, illusory because it comes from an (electorally speaking) modest cadre of like minded socialist workers. The reforms to the voting system ushered in by Ed gave the party to these loons on a plate and handed the impetus direct to the right and alt right that we've seen so much in evidence lately.

I'm a liberal, pro European, middle of the road lifetime Labour voter but have no more in common, politically, with those in control of the party than I seem to have with you.

I accept that my views appear presently to be out of whack with the majority of the UK, or at least the blue collar UK and that's something to think about, in terms of what comes next.

Aside from anything else and as I've again made plain elsewhere, I consider there to be an extremely nasty anti Semitic streak in the party as current constituted, which I simply can't accept.

So I won't be voting for it till Corbyn and his mob are gone, whenever that may be.

Just a lawyer

I find a lot of very odd people hanging around outside the RCJ on any given day and I'm not talking bout the lawyers. Its an magnet for anti establishment, oddball CT elite mongers and Brexit types, of all stripes. I'll keep an eye open for you next time I'm there!

If Brexiters get their way we may all end living in cardboard boxes; a dog will be luxury...

No, thanks. I read an awful lot about the EU pre-referendum. I'll just wait and see what happens. After all, it's not as if I have a choice about that is it? I mean, the referendum's over and done. Nothing you or I can do now will affect that.

Unless you're in May's Cabinet?

Although I think we will exit the EU, how hard or soft it will be is still very much up in the air.

As someone I know called it - 50 shades of May