shurlock

Thanks for proving my point. Not quite the effect you intended, though I'm not sure you even know what you're trying to say

Just call it a deal then. HTH.

We've already gone through that particular forecast pal. You and your little brigade made a fool of yourselves over it. However trust you dredge it up and embarrass yourself again.

Give me James Beattie anyday.

Surely it's bat s**t crazy rather than repugnant. Trust you to get hysterical though.

What did you make of the productivity stats pal? You were haranguing me for an answer; now you've gone all quiet. #tailbetweenthelegs

Vic has been playing well for Spurs and is keeping Dier out of the side. Spurs fans pleasantly surprised by his distribution and ability to bring ball forward.

McQueen is a converted winger, so it's not surprising he had joy against a team that sat back and offered nothing in attack. Lets see how well he defends before getting too excited.

Wasn't that Swansea? Shelvey scored that day from distance.

Good point about the differences in stewarding.

What does up to mean (other than a sleight of hand)? Would a correction have happened? In principle yes, but imbalances can persist for a long time. The more important thing is how that correction plays out - that it is smooth and orderly, not sudden and steep that is liable to freak out businesses and investors, creating fresh problems.

There are plenty of cases of devaluations making no difference -and exiting the ERM happened in very different historical and economic conditions (e.g. the growth of global supply chains meaning that whatever gains are made through a devaluation in terms of the competitiveness of a firm or country's exports are equally likely to be lost through pricier imports). All while the facts and reality currently tell us the trade deficit is widening...

The ONS, OECD etc all publishes those stats (ignore Baldrick, they are all reliable and credible sources). The quick brief (page 9) pulls things together. Of course, anyone who claimed any understanding of the UK would llkely know this already. researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06492/SN06492.pdf

Not sure you can draw lessons from England games where supporters likely travel away a lot and have had many more opportunities and iterations to set groundrules. Let's just say that whenever we take large numbers away, there are always plenty of people insisting on sitting in their seat numbers. If our ends are full up, it doesnt take many for that to spread.

Just saw this Les Labour productivity - output per hour worked, a standard, uncontroversial measure of productivity. It was commonly used and accepted before Brexit and it will be commonly used and accepted after it. From your babbling "all sources of income which constitute GDP" - it appears you don't have a clue what you're talking about and just making noise to throw people off the scent. Yes the UK trails major peers -nobody contests that whatever their political views or allegiances, pal.

Poor old Baldrick has been royally taken to the cleaners on this thread -recent highlights include poor Richard Branson analogies, a basic misunderstanding of the concept of productivity and championing the benefits of sterlings fall, even as the UK's trade deficit continues to widen. Never mind the all-time classic how the UK is meaningfully going to diversify its exports within a time frame so unrealistic that even my dog would wince -all to secure leverage to negotiate a better deal. Spare him a few crumbs of comfort even if he has to make things up in the process.

Did big Keith's team win?

Not sure what you're talking about - think you're referring to someone else. I didnt weigh in on the specifics of the Lloyds case, just made a general observation about your dismissal of contrary evidence as being tainted by money and special favours - a bizarro little ditty youve rolled out time and time again.

So from being virulently undemocratic, the EU is now too democratic in your eyes Not sure why you dredged up the Soviet Union - probably says more about you and your own flights of fancy than the case at hand.

Les, given you and others all sing from the same six-fingered hymn-sheet, my 'structured rebuttal' should be pretty clear from my other posts. Sorry for not addressing you personally, though pal - one might say it's an occupational hazard of having to negotiate with many members.

In the real world, there are things called trade-offs, pal. Costs and benefits. The flipside of the messiness and grind of having to secure internal agreement between members is the external leverage and muscle that comes with being able to negotiate as a bloc. One goes with the other. Brexiters would come across as a little less dim and naive if they acknowledged both sides of the ledger.

As the UK is about to find out when the shoe is on the other foot, right Baldrick. Thankfully the UK has a plan to enjoy the benefits of trade with the EU and precedents from which to draw reassurance -just like CETA which David Davis called the perfect starting point for the UK's discussions with the Commission or Bojo termed as an example for the UK to follow, heralding a very, very bright future. Whoops...

Good to see you missing the wood for the trees once again Les.

Exactly. And to think the ingenues on here looked to Canada deal's with the EU as a model for Brexit. Some panacea, right pal

Act II of Baldrick's cunning plan -as is common practice for him- will be to claim those journos once took the Eurostar to Brussels and enjoyed a complimentary croissant upon arrival. By association that must mean they are fully paid up lackeys for the European superelite and so their work cannot be trusted. The jokes on you for not seeing this web of deceit and corruption and not doing due diligence on your sources. Game, set and match. #followthemoney