Wes Tender

I thought that reading this might help you:- http://www.helpguide.org/articles/anxiety/obssessive-compulsive-disorder-ocd.htm

Yes, I did know what it means in German. No doubt you will therefore be happy to list any German Leaders other than Hitler who used or were given that epithet and also why you felt it apposite to use the word in connection with a British citizen appointed as the leader of a British Party.

As usual, you throw around statistics which make assumptions that are not necessarily borne out by the actual circumstances. What I understand about stats, is that they can be produced to support virtually any position. You are too inclined to take them as gospel without question, but I am more cynical. For example, you cite there being more births than deaths by 200,000, but I presume that these young additions to a family will live in the same house as their parents, whereas your statistics will happily add them to the number of new houses required. OK, the family might need a larger house, but then to an extent that is countered by the deaths of the elderly who often lived in under occupied houses. My mother for example lives alone in a three bedroom house. When you talk of new homes, then much accommodation is provided by the conversion of large houses into flats and appartments. Many immigrants, especially from the Eastern European countries are single men, who live several to a house. The birth rate exceeds the death rate, but somehow the size of the average household declines. On the basis of those points I made, I question the validity of your statistics concluding that 327,000 new homes are required. Where the numbers of uncontrolled immigrants is easier to assess, you might speak in terms of "only" 48,000 homes, but patently this is still a significant number and one that controlled immigration from the EU will assist in reducing. Of course, the extra burden on the Education and Health systems are also factors tied in with the uncontrolled immigration, not just housing. Sorry to disappoint, but my house was built as a very small development on the former grounds of a large single house, so no development of virgin green fields, I'm afraid.

Godwin's Law

We don't need an excuse for Brexit. It wasn't what we originally joined and the changes brought about by successive treaties are reason enough to leave. But instead of trying to address the problem of housing shortages which have been caused by uncontrolled immigration from the EU, your solution is to concrete over our countryside with 4 million extra houses. Brilliant.

Always worth having another look at that, but Sims doesn't get himself on the score sheet. Gallagher and Hesketh excelled that day. Gallagher is on fire at Blackburn and Puel must be licking his lips at the prospect of adding him to his fellow academy mates that are featuring currently. The time might come in the not to distant future when we could field half a team comprising academy graduates and them not looking at all out of place. Despite Koeman's opinion that they were not up to it, the Saints academy conveyor belt is once more producing the goods.

What a contrast to Thursday's effort, or more correctly, lack of it. Right from the kick off, there was a determined resolve to apply immediate pressure on Everton and it paid dividends in an eye-blinking 41 seconds. The team sheet held only one surprise, the inclusion of 19 year old academy player Josh Sims and before anybody had time to fully absorb the reason for his inclusion, he had already justified it by assisting Austin's goal, joining an exclusive club of players at the club to achieve that on their debut. Sims had a couple of good chances to have scored too and many had him as MOTM and entirely worthy of a standing ovation when substituted towards the end of the match. Of course, this was a grudge match because of the circumstances of Koeman's departure, so whether the impetus towards this full-blooded display from the players was influenced by that, or to make amends for the dismal performance on Thursday is debatable. Thankfully this match was the one that counted towards our position in the PL, whereas Thursday's match, although disappointing, still left us in a position to progress to the knock-out stages. Koeman left us to join a club lower down the table and it would be very satisfying if we were to finish above them this season too. He was obviously a bit shaken by this defeat and took it in very bad grace, especially terse in his response to questioning about the performances of the academy players like Sims and McQueen who he had not considered good enough to be selected by him. This was picked up by MOTD2, who were fairly scathing towards Koeman's undignified response and fulsome in their praise of Sims and Southampton's conveyor belt of talent from the academy. In an interview with Koeman before the match, he had assessed part of the reason for his move to Everton:- Right, Koeman, you think that nobody here was unhappy when you failed to get a win for seven games, because we were just happy to be in the PL? And I don't recall that the players who we brought in to replace those we sold needed that much time to adapt to their new surroundings. So you joined Everton because they have higher expectations, and that therefore there is more criticism aimed at the manager. But instead of basking in the criticism you have received subsequent to your faded glory team being totally outplayed by your old team deprived of three key players who were sold in the summer and featuring a 19 year old debutant, you appear to have taken the criticism rather badly. Carry on as you are and you might yet come to rue your decision to leave for what you considered to be greener pastures. The attraction of doubling your salary there will ultimately be balanced against the damage to your career if you cannot get Everton into a CL position. The positives of how many good performances were put in by several players have already been well covered by others. Just two additional things that strike me; firstly we have given our confidence a great boost for the forthcoming Arsenal match. Secondly, I thought that Pawson's refereeing was excellent.

I welcome the intervention into the post-Referendum political landscape of two ex-Prime ministers, Messrs Blair and Major. Their assistance to the Brexit cause is a valuable asset, especially Blair's. He is widely despised by the liberal left Remainians for taking us into the Iraq war, so support for him is compromised from the start with many of the very people he is trying to assist. But what is breathtaking is the hypocrisy of both of them in citing democracy as the reason why the electorate should be granted a second referendum on the terms of our Brexit, once negotiations have been held with the EU. Blair had twice promised a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon and failed to deliver it. Major was happy to deny us a referendum on the Treaty of Maastricht, which did more to change the basis of our association with Europe from the original Common Market towards a Federal EU. He was happy to deny the electorate a referendum when it involved closer integration into the European project, but now insists on another one when we choose to leave it, so it is a bit rich him bleating about democracy now. Had either of them as Prime Minister allowed the referenda that ought to have been held at the times of those two significant Treaties, then we might not have ended up in this situation whereby a majority of the electorate who voted in this referendum had decided that we would be better off outside the EU.

I have already told you that I am an admirer of the Jewish people and hold no great regard for the Arabs, so seemingly the opposite of the Labour Party. If you don't believe me, then tough titties, it doesn't bother me.

Finally an acceptance that the percentage of companies exporting to the EU is valid. Statistics like this are always meaningless to the lefties, until something similar comes up which is dear to their hearts. For example statistics like those showing that the top 10% of households control 45% of total household wealth and that the top 10%'s wealth is also five times the combined wealth of the bottom 50% of people in the country. Then the small number becomes highly significant when the context suits the agenda. Again, your thought processes continue to amuse me. How can a wait and see position be optimistic and naive when usually it is the sensible and steady option when faced with an uncertainty? There is no logic behind that statement at all. My position has been that there might be short term difficulties caused by Brexit, but in the subsequent period we will look back at it and realise that it was the best thing that we did in our recent history, just as we did when we dodged a bullet by not joining the Eurozone, contrary to the economists dire warnings. You insist that Brexit will be a disaster and accuse me of ideologically myopia in not acknowledging it. Conversely, your position and your ideological myopia will not allow you to countenance the possibility that our future will be better served outside of the EU, so please don't accuse me of something that also applies to you, or that is hypocrisy.

How many times before it penetrates yours and CEC's skull? The percentages have been checked by a reputable independent fact checking body, so they are not fallacious or sophistry. Either bring your own figures to the table to disprove these, or quit making yourselves look silly. I understand that the value of exports by those companies is important to our economy, but they will generally continue to export to the EU, just as the EU will continue to export to us. Even if tariffs are applied both ways, they will be low and we will probably still have the advantage of a weak pound making our products better value. A bit silly to talk about future trade deals expectations being overly optimistic or mindbogglingly naive when as you say they have not yet been negotiated. Equally of course, it is incredibly naive to indulge yourself in all this hand wringing, wailing and gnashing of teeth before we have even triggered article 50. I suggest that you calm yourself and await that eventuality; you'll feel a lot better for it.

I merely pointed out that Nick had to correct your fallacy that it was only right wingers who had voted for Brexit, unless you are going to classify that strong vote in the Labour heartlands that Nick spoke of as being right wing. Where did I deny being a Conservative voter? I have voted Conservative in every election all my life apart from once when I voted UKIP during the last European Elections and that was purely to add strength to the campaign to force a Referendum on the EU. I have also stated several times that I had wanted us to leave the EU since Maastricht. I am entirely content to be classified as being on the right wing of British politics; it is nothing that I am reticent to admit. I agree that people should have the courage of their convictions, which is why I voted to leave the EU, having all those years ago campaigned on the doorstep to join the Common Market. Unless you can argue otherwise, I would claim to be probably more politically motivated by my convictions than you perhaps. And once again, I challenge your assertion that posting the percentage of UK businesses engaged in export trade with the EU is misleading. For a start, it is a bit disingenuous of you to cite just the 6% figure, when I had widened the scope by a third higher to cover the range of opinion, so a bit rich you talking of distortion. And unless you are going to provide your own source of statistics to discredit those provided by the fact checker site, then they are not misleading.

Naturally it doesn't matter much to you, but it brings some perspective to the situation, in that the vast majority of British businesses do not export to the EU, so they will continue much as before post-Brexit. That is not technically inaccurate, nor sophistry; you just won't admit that you were wrong, but I should at least be grateful that you begin to accept the accuracy of the statistic, albeit grudgingly. And please don't assume that you know what I am thinking; you don't. As with most Remainians when you speak of the importance of our trade with the EU, you insinuate that Brexit voters don't realise the importance of it. But that trade is not going to suddenly disappear, is it? There may be small tariffs, but the volume of trade will largely remain much the same. This will be a price worth paying for the other pluses like regaining lost sovereignty, control of our borders, restoring the power of our own legal system and having the ability to set up our own bilateral trade agreements with the rest of the World. Typically for the Remainians, as in the Referendum campaign they concentrated purely on the economic aspects and didn't wish to engage on all of the other aspects. And as Nick correctly pointed out, you have a very blinkered view of the spectrum of support there was for Leaving the EU.

Pathetic - just truly awful

How ironic that you infer that my vocabulary is not as broad as yours and then go on to continue to misuse the word sophistry. You applied it my assertion that only 6-8% of British companies exported to the EU and the evidence of that independent fact checking organisation proved that usage to be invalid, so I do not have to defend myself against the charge at all. Regarding your preference to speak of the sizeable proportion of UK exports to the EU, you will now no doubt accept that it is a small percentage of British companies who manage to achieve this high volume of exports and no doubt many of those companies' products and services are also sent around the World too. The obvious significance of the small percentage of companies involved in exporting to the EU, is that the vast majority of British businesses will carry on as normal post-Brexit. In your last paragraph, you suppose wrong. I have previously asserted that trade tariffs benefit nobody and our position would be that we would wish to continue trading with the EU without them. If they seek to cut of their nose to spite their face, then we will have to decide whether to reciprocate. The fact that we will increase our trade with the rest of the World once free to arrange bilateral free trade deals, will mean that the proportion of trade will naturally increase in favour of the rest of the World, regardless of whether it might decline with the EU if they impose tariffs, causing their products to become less competitive. It really is up to them.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I am somehow anti-semitic. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I am nothing of the sort. I am an admirer of the Jewish peoples and don't harbour much admiration or indeed liking for the Arabs. I believe that I have said this before, but it is obviously taking some time to penetrate your skull. As amusing as that quote is, he misses the point by trying to make a comparison with the right wing of politics and the far right, compared to the liberal left. The comparison would be more apt if he spoke of the left wing of politics compared to the extreme left. If he is speaking of mental illnesses, then that is not something that only afflicts people whose political views are right of centre any more than it affects liberals who are left of centre. I was interested in one of the comments in response to the article and thought that you would be too. I know how much you love the new leadership of the Labour Party, so thought you might appreciate it.

I can understand your bluster, because the figures that you labelled as sophistry turned out to be nothing of the sort and are backed up by a well respected independent organisation which exists to examine the veracity of such statements and claims made in campaigns such as the Referendum. As you say, one can find anything that supports a particular point of view, so you are welcome to trawl the internet to find your own figures regarding the percentage of British businesses who export to the EU and I'll look at your source. P.S. I am not in a hole. I was aware of this percentage figure from during the Referendum campaign and have used it before. Neither are my views particularly hard-line, as they coincide with most of the electorate who voted to Leave the EU. If my posts are tedious to you, there is an ignore button, you know.

https://fullfact.org/europe/how-many-businesses-export-eu/ Are you going to contact them and accuse them of sophistry? Perhaps you will put them (and us) right with your accurately researched figures. Nobody is disputing your 44% figure, although exports to the EU have fallen over recent years whilst exports to the rest of the World have risen and will rise again once we are free to negotiate our own trade deals.

Show me where I said that distance didn't matter. But it matters less than it did decades ago and will matter even less as our trade with the rest of the World increases and economies of scale further reduce costs. For somebody as bright as you think you are, this concept is taking a long to penetrate.

The more that I show up some of your arguments as implausible, the more you attempt to massage your ego by insults. You're shown up on the transportation of exported and imported goods, citing decades old literature on problems with it that have largely been overcome and so you go off on a tangent about services. Because a significant amount of these imported/exported goods is via container ships, you accuse me of being obsessed with it. Try and debate the points raised instead of making yourself look ridiculous by your usual obfuscation tactics and petty insults.

Caught out by the source of that info and trying to deflect it onto something else? I'd love to know where your two thirds of the UK workforce comes from. From what I can glean, we have around 32 million in work in the UK, 23 million in full time employment. Of those, 3.3 million to 4.2 million by a generous estimate are tied in with exports to the EU, so two thirds seems a tad overstated to me.

This will be that well known half baked agenda led source https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/ The self styled "THE UK’S INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKING CHARITY"

Did I make any suggestion that this was not so? No, I didn't. But these 6-8% of British companies that export around about £220 billion of goods and services to other EU countries were worth about 12% of the value of the British economy in 2015.

Are you and the moonraker one and the same, Shorluck? He responds to my posts first with his one or two line waffle and then you come on here with your usual ad hominem diatribe, often shooting off in tangents to try and widen the debate into other areas where you believe that you can make yourself look clever. Yes, emerging economies have encouraged export growth, but the EU's trade arrangements with these emerging economies is pathetic, because of the sclerotic pace that it can progress trying to drag all member states into agreements when the national interests of some member states is compromised. Many believe that we will be able to negotiate trade deals with these countries before the EU can. Sorry if that concept is something that could undermine your position. Good of you to mention Germany and our trade with them, as had you read that link, it makes the case that we are far more important to them as a trading partner than China is, but I don't see any argument from you against the case that they make that our leverage is greater than the EU's. I'm surprised that you don't accuse the author of being ignorant, out of his depth, a non-entity. I am also amused that you defend your stance on the logistical problems of trading further afield, citing decades of literature. No doubt closer inspection of that literature would increasingly acknowledge that these logistical problems have eased with the passage of time and the development of even bigger container ships carrying larger cargoes more efficiently and there then being the most modern port facilities to handle the containers and utilise the much improved onward transportation infrastructure. Don't worry about my serenity, me old mucker. I'm totally at ease with the situation and confident of our future. I suspect that judging by your posts, you could do with taking some chill pills.

As usual, you never cease to disappoint, Shorluck, me old mucker. Where did I suggest that we would enjoy the same access we currently do? That is something that will only become clear once the horse trading begins next year and nobody knows for certain what will transpire. I never even mentioned the EU services market, as CEC was talking about British Industry, not Services. And you have the temerity to suggest that it is I who needs to have the Peter and Jane version in order to comprehend simple English. Our trade with the rest of the World has increased in recent years whilst decreasing with Europe, (the figures of the EU trade being distorted a little by the Rotterdam effect). That appears to be despite these logistical obstacles that you make a fuss about. Regarding our negotiating position, I am quite aware that those who advocated our remaining in the EU choose to argue that the EU has greater leverage than us, whereas the counter argument was taken by the Leave campaign. Some of those arguments regarding the leverage we hold are articulated here:- http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/nevermind-the-brexit-uk-will-emerge-with-a-good-trade-deal.html but I'm sure that you have heard them all before, even though you choose to dismiss them. Sorry if these arguments put a dent in your egotistical opinion of yourself as some sort of super intelligent expert.