Apauling, positively anti humanity -
Worry not, anybody with the capacity and wherewithal to actually turn up would, by the very nature of the course, face an instant ban.
in a negotiation you always have to have the right to walk away - if you donāt, you get a terrible deal.:- David Davis.
No deal is unthinkable:- Amber Rudd (a few minutes later)
The EU27 must be wondering who the hell they are negotiating with when they see & hear these sorts of contradictory statements coming from senior UK ministers. Itās an utter shambles.
As somebody pointed out, the EU27 are more united than the UK1 !
4 Likes
David Davis, a man who seems to suffer from the same lack of imagination as his parents 
2 Likes
Perhaps the next leader will be Boris Johnson, a man who sees genocide as the first stage of a planning application
2 Likes
Is it just me or did that article fail to give one example of how he would tax the elderly more?
Not just you, I couldnāt find anything about the proposed age thresholds or tax levels etc. Just seemed to be about public sector pay cuts and the fact that tory voters are wrinkly old grey cunts.
1 Like
No, they are your criteria. Mine is simply based on age, although with an upper limit as well as a lower one.
You asked about the unemployed and unable to work, and I think that they should be included.
I understand that some people who would really like to vote wouldnāt be able to under my proposal, but they can certainly try to influence society based upon their extensive experience and wisdom - they may well have cultivated many contacts and systems of influence, and they could utilise these. Thatās likely to have a lot more impact than a single vote as well.
It must be said that my system takes it as read that the elderly must be treated with respect, with adequate pensions and healthcare. Unfortunately itās possible that the only reason that governments provide this is to ensure the elderly vote, which is simply abominable.
I really do think this, and I think that the should be a view from the elderly that āitās your world now, just look after us and then change the world as you think it should become.ā
You havenāt mentioned euthanasia yet 
2 Likes
ftfy
1 Like
Hang on, one of us said āThe cut off should be perhaps the state retirement age. They are hardly more economically active than a child, and often just as looked after, so why do they get more rights?ā. Shit, was that me ? Iād have sworn it was you (I must be getting old ā¦).
Right, because itās not as if loneliness disproportionately affects the old.
No shit, Sherlock.
Stop it, youāre frightening me.
Perhaps the one silver lining would be that since the untermenschen will be deemed incompetent to vote theyāll also, obviously, be denied the right to sit in any positions of responsibility. So at least weāll get rid of the House of Lords, quite a few of the Commons and much of the judiciary. Itāll be great not having to worry about any of the decision makers being burdened with a memory of what happened the last time we tried that stupid f**king idea 
.
VB
6 Likes
7 Likes
Steve Bell in the Guardian
4 Likes
Watching an interview on Newsnight last night with the President of the EU Parliament, it looks like the price for a trade deal is Ā£60 billion.
If this holds true is it value for money?
It is not the price of a trade deal. It is the value that the EU places on the net financial position of the UK with respect to its existing agreements and commitments. The UK is in a position to dispute this figure, but thus far has chosen not to.
The Government agreed to the scheduling of the talks which means it knew that the financial settlement had to be resolved before a trade agreement can be negotiated. David Davis has made five statements to parliament about progress/achievements in the negotiations, all have said the same thing: we have achieved nothing. The decision to have an election hasnāt helped.
The Govt position is this:
We agree to settle our ādebtsā before moving to a FTA. We wont discuss our debts until we get an FTA.
Accepting your premise for the time being, has anyone made even a crude estimate of the payback time ? The simplest basis for that would be to look at the difference between zero-tariff trade with the EU (not that weād necessarily get that under a trade deal) versus WTO tariffs, plus whatever the impact might be on the service (i.e. finance) sector assuming no radical change (e.g. most of the banks not upping sticks for Frankfurt). Iād say if the payback time was less than 10 years then the deal would be reasonable value for money.
VB
The bill from the EU if the UK stayed a member would be in excess of Ā£10Billion per annum, so what they are asking for is that Germany and France donāt have to pay this starting in 2019!
You are missing out the very substantial costs of implementing controls, the costs of time (losing the ability to have JIT manufacturing) add the like, notwithstanding the other losses from Brexit.
And your choice of a ten year timescale perhaps is the most stark demonstration of the difference between our positions in this thread.
Isolating other countries from our stupidity is an entirely logical and understandable position. Another way of looking at the Ā£60bn is that it is the cost of regaining some part of a reputation as a reasonable country.