buctootim

Norway has control too. They control their borders, it just so happens they choose to let EU nationals in and the EU choose to give them access to the single market. Of course control is the important thing, theory is so much more important than practice.

The election is all about giving May the wiggle room to deliver a Norway deal on exit dummy.

They have, which oddly enough coincided with their wage growth to the point where they now earn around 50% more compared to most other western countries, the second highest in the world after the US. Like most NHS privatisations we end up paying more for the same service. https://medicfootprints.org/10-highest-paid-countries-world-doctors/

Thankfully not everyone is a Wes.

I don't agree with the tweet but May's comment about needing an election because Parliament is divided was bizarre and a bit worrying. You always need effective opposition regardless of your policies or views.

Im sure it could be done if he had enough support. If Corbyn resigns after the council elections Labour will be leaderless until they can organise a vote which won't be until after the general election. DM could be the interim leader or just announce his intention to stand and play a high profile role in the campaign as the face of labour in the media.

The only chance is that Corbyn goes after being humiliated in the May council elections and the electable Miliband comes charging back from New York. Even then there is very little time for him to make an impression.

Callaghan wasn't left wing! He was a middle of the road Social Democrat. Granted he has some left wing head bangers in his cabinet, like Tony Benn and Barbara Castle but he mostly kept them on a leash.

Master tactitian Corbyn has ruled out working with other opposition parties to ensure the anti Tory vote isnt split in marginal constituencies http://uk.businessinsider.com/snap-general-election-2017-green-party-calls-for-electoral-pacts-with-labour-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

Evening Standard are quoting the CBI as thinking May has called the election in order to push through softer 'transitional' deals on immigration and free trade which inevitably become permanent. The thinking is that the Tories would have been punished in 2020 but 2022 buys them more time.

Lets hope you're not a Tory reneging on a categoric assurance - like £350m for the NHS or no election before 2020.

Probably wont need any more time than that

Also very odd to cite the reason for calling the election as Westminster being divided. I thought that was the point. Nobody wants parliamentary democracy where everyone agrees with each other - you'd end up as North Korea.

I cant see Corbyn resigning, he seems to think the bulk of the party is behind him. If true I guess the Tory thinking is that they'd rather face a leaderless Labour in June than one with a new, possibly very electable, leader in two or three years time.

My constituency is rock solid Tory but voted remain in the referendum. The constituency next to mine in Lewes is marginal Lib Dem / conservative. Im hoping the LDs can swing it but its going to be an absolute cluster**** for Labour. If only they had ditched him before this.

That proves the opposite of what you intended. Even a report commissioned by a pro euro lobby group talks about lost opportunities and influence, not economic implosion.

This is my favourite! Pop1eye wrote: Plenty of seats? It was sold out at home weeks ago! Ghost wrote: Was it fancy dress day then? 'Cause a lot of your fans went dressed as seats.

Whether it has or hasn't doesnt really matter, its perception which counts. Domestic demand since Brexit has been unsustainably high and that has flattered economic growth. That made a lot of people think the negative effects of Brexit were imaginary scare mongering. But high debt, expensive housing and wage settlements below inflation are going to be making a lot of people feel poorer. Brexit will get some of the blame for that. Combined with gradual job losses from the City - not massive immediately but drip drip the effect will be amplified. The full impact of Brexit will be seen after 20 years, not a couple of weeks after Article 50 but public opinion wont wait for the real verdict .

Cant see it. She may well be the most popular candidate, but probably also the one most people will actively vote against. The polls are suggesting she will win the first round but then be crushed by a centrist run off vote.

I had a brain fart My (obvious) point is though that the smaller you are the harder it is to stay in the PL. You will spend more time outside the PL if you only sell 18,000 tickets on a Saturday than if you sell 60,000. The best Pompey can hope for is the Championship with occasional forays into the PL, and on that basis it seems to me there are better clubs to buy, given the amount of investment they need.

Lets see where Bournemouth are in five years. Look at the table from a few years ago . Where are Watford, Bolton, Blackburn, Charlton, Ipswich, Wigan, Reading, Hull etc now? Agree the PL tv money is most important in terms of paying the bills but level of support is important too - not just for gate income, but merchandising and for attracting players.

Cheap to buy but will need a hell of a lot of investment in the stadium, training ground and squad - and then even with all that investment the catchment area isnt big enough to support a solid PL team. They are more natural top half of Championship with occasional lucky forays into the PL. It only makes sense to make mega millions investment in a club if you thought it could compete sustainably where the real cash is, in the top league.

The other big factor is that people have been borrowing more and saving less, which has artificially fuelled demand post Brexit. By its nature this cant be sustained and will at some point go into reverse as people cut spending in order to service higher debts.

Seriously? Does anyone dispute that it takes a minimum of six months and often years for any policy change to have an effect on the real economy.