pk

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Good question pk. > > As far as I understand it the Govt?s argument is > that the WA is ambiguous and many of the details > were to be ironed out in the course of > negotiations through ?the Joint committee?. > So to say it was ?oven ready? was a lie

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Now, the WA has given the EU power to override UK > unity and seamless trade all because the EU wants > to collect taxes if goods enter the Republic. > > An oversimplification on my part perhaps but since > when did the UK bow down to foreign tax > collectors? > > Discuss So the question is since when did the UK agree to the WA? That was at the point that Boris said he?d got Brexit done with a great deal Including the things he now doesn?t like If he didn?t intend to honour the WA cause he didn?t like it surely he shouldn?t have campaigned for it and signed it rather than sign it and renege? What good would come from that?

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I suggest you read what is in the bill and try to > understand why it is there. it's there cos Boris doesn't want to honour an agreement that he made which as a matter of fact makes him dishonest and untrustworthy, shameful

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I?m not sure pk. It is a bit high stakes. So you think it?s genius even tho you know that it?s a high stakes move with an uncertain impact? That?s weird

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Deep breaths and count to 10 remainers. Exciting > yourselves is not good for your blood pressure. > > It?s a tactic to up the stakes in the > negotiations. Barnier was caught with his trousers > down colouring in paragraphs with his highlighter > pens. > > The EU has now woken up and the big players will > need to get off their arses and get involved. > > Genius really. so for those of us with less trust in Boris than you seem to have, tell us what this genius move will deliver in real terms

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nothing to talk about. > > A bill has been put forward that has had the > desired effect of making the EU pee its pants and > Remaners run round like headless chickens. Nothing > has been voted on, no Act passed. > > Chill folks. A PM effectively saying that a deal he did is sh*t having said it was brilliant is nothing to talk about? That agreement was voted on and executed and you think planning not to honour it is not an issue? It?s unlikely to make EU or other potential trade partners think that we can be trusted But I guess some people think that being a massive bullsh*ter is something to be proud of

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm only breaking the lockdown rules in a limited > and specific way, officer... I do wonder about the timing of this announcement It?s been a convenient distraction from Boris? plans not to honour international law

j.a. Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is going to be...interesting. it's shameful dishonesty

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > womanofdulwich Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Do we really have to recruit from Australia? > Can > > he get a work visa? > > > Are you opposed to immigrants being employed in > the UK? Is he actually immigrating then?

jimlad48 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > We literally have nothing to fear except fear itself, sadly fear is winning. What kinda BS is that?!?

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > so i'm not sure that anyone with informed > knowledge is suggesting herd immunity is a good > strategy - you got a credible source? > > Of course herd immunity is a good strategy - it is > precisely what a vaccination programme tries to > create - on the basis that some people cannot be > vaccinated because of other conditions - what you > are challenging is the creation of herd immunity > through infection - which in general may be a poor > idea (although Sweden's figures, who followed this > course) are not much worse (indeed on some > measures better) than ours. > > I am suggesting that, before a vaccine is > available, if those who are little troubled by the > virus do become immune to it (or if their next > infection is very much less troublesome than their > first, possibly including the level to which they > can infect others) then they will create, for the > winter months when we might expect Covid-19 to be > worse, some sort of wall which may reduce the > impact of the next wave. > > I'd far rather they understood their risk - and > the risk they might pose to others - get infected > now, get over it (avoiding exposure to the > vulnerable) and create that wall which may make > the second wave spread less damaging. > > We almost certainly are going to have to live with > Covid-19 in the population for the foreseeable > future - we cannot continue as we are - damping > down all fun and all economic activity. We cannot > expect the young to continue to protect the old, > with nothing in it for them. Far better we let > them have some enjoyment whilst continuing to be > careful of the vulnerable. So yes clearly I was talking about herd immunity through natural infection, sorry if that wasn?t clear to you after I asked about your suggestion that people go out and rub together to achieve herd immunity I see an awful lot of ifs, possiblys and maybes above so not for the first time - you got any credible sources that support herd immunity thru rubbing together? Or that Sweden has got it right even tho they?ve had far more deaths than their neighbours (and haven?t achieved herd immunity)? Otherwwise saying people should ?understand their risk and the risk to others? is pretty meaningless

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Just killing the italics not sure what the above means, but seems very unimportant i answered your question you going to answer mine?

seenbeen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sweden has been bandied about as a good example of > the herd immunity approach as it didn't impose a > compulsory lockdown. > https://www.newscientist.com/article/2251615-is-sw > edens-coronavirus-strategy-a-cautionary-tale-or-a- > success-story/ "What is clear is that so far Sweden has had a more protracted outbreak with far more deaths per capita than its neighbours." it'll be interesting too how it plays out of the course of the pandemic, but not sure the above shows herd immunity is a great plan (or that Sweden will achieve it, they haven't yet)

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but people have been reinfected in much less than > the 6-12 months that you (randomly) > guesstimate/i> > > I don't believe there is any evidence of > re-infection anywhere - some early cases were > re-interpreted as testing failures. Can you cite > any authority for this? - I would be happy to > stand corrected. what about you answer the questions i asked of you? if you google 'covid reinfection' you'll find multiple reports from credible sources from this week here's one of many: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/experts-reveal-two-patients-have-reinfected-covid-19/ if you search 'covid herd immunity' you don't in fact the top result on my search (the Lancet) says that 'the creation of herd immunity by natural infection' is 'an ill-defined and dangerous notion'

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So long as they stay away from the elderly and vulnerable the more young > people who get it, the better, frankly, if they do > gain some immunity (6 months to a year?) which is > now being suggested. In effect, they are being > inoculated against the virus - and will start to > build the numbers that herd immunity would > require. but people have been reinfected in much less than the 6-12 months that you (randomly) guesstimate so i'm not sure that anyone with informed knowledge is suggesting herd immunity is a good strategy - you got a credible source? > > I would suggest to the young - go out and party, > rub together, enjoy life this strikes me as a reckless suggestion based on little or no science

Moflo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely this is illegal? Any advise? it's probably a contract matter - does the contract say what should happen in these circumstances?

niledynodely Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However if you want research by neutral providers please see this Cochrane Review. > Cochrane reviews are regarded as the gold standard > in all types of research. It confirms what I have > said. no it doesn't there's no suggestion that education should be limited to periods and birds and bees

snowy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Both organisations are led by Mormons. i wondered whether that was a typo for a mo and you'd added an extra letter by mistake! it made me chuckle and arguably would be right with or without two 'm's

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... You can only educate and inform ... > > I don?t think to OP is disagreeing with this j.a. > the op thinks 'Unfortunately Relationships and Sex Education is no longer simply teaching children about periods.' and 'the birds and the bees' so i think that they're not looking for much by way of education or information but plenty of denial as to the reality of the world that most of us now live in, where most educated and informed people are tolerant of others' sexual choices

seenbeen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > after the devastating impact of the bloody covid 19 which is > UNPRECEDENTED....and since you Boris naysayers are > NOT part of the solution you are part of the > problem imo. > so what is it that you are doing to be part of 'the solution'? (and what is the problem that you think you're solving?)

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > pk Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > TheCat Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > you're right - nothing happening in the EU > has > > > any bearing on what happens here in the UK > does > > > it? because that hasn't been the entire > > discussion > > > for the past 4 years has it? you do make me > > laugh, > > > i'll give you that. > > > > so why are you so happy to express opinions you > > know are ill-informed? > > Give it up mate. Your desire to 'get one' over me > is a bit pathetic, and you're embarrassing > yourself now. if you don't want people calling out your hypocritcal Remain baiting BS you probably should stop posting it

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you're right - nothing happening in the EU has > any bearing on what happens here in the UK does > it? because that hasn't been the entire discussion > for the past 4 years has it? you do make me laugh, > i'll give you that. so why are you so happy to express opinions you know are ill-informed?

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > KidKruger Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > "...it would be painted as desperate and > pathetic > > attempt to stop the tidal wave of companies > > wanting to leave brexit Britain....." > > > > But The Cat that's exactly what it would be, no > ?! > > yes it would. Totally agree. > > to clarify....Comment is more noting the lack of > any comment from any remainer commentators > criticising the deperation of the dutch making > this move. And what it might suggest about the > relative attractiveness of the UK post brexit. So you?re criticising people for not criticising a foreign government in relation to something that you admit you have a ?relatively uninformed opinion? on What?a the point of that?

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > pk Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > TheCat Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > both desperate in my book, whoever made > such a move. Just flagging that I don't see a host > of remainers coming out to label the dutch as > desperate, and discussing the implications of such > a move...whereas I believe they would be joyous > slating the UK govt if it was the other way > around.... > Perhaps remainers are rightly more interested in UK affairs then Dutch affairs Thanks for the snipe tho

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Yeah...a pretty desperate move by the Dutch > left....it's possible, but be surprised if a) it's > legal, and b) it passes.....but that's a > relatively uninformed opinion, so stranger things > have happened. > > The point here from the article is that a number > of businesses are seeing some attraction in being > based in post-brexit Britain. So perhaps the > country won't be the basket case that some have > been worried about. Of course, as the article > alludes to, final negotiations with EU will govern > the end result. > > As an aside, imagine the remainer outrage and > derision if Boris implemented a punitive tax > policy to stop companies leaving the UK?....it > would be painted as desperate and pathetic attempt > to stop the tidal wave of companies wanting to > leave brexit Britain..... so it's fine for you to call the Dutch desperate but it'd be wrong to call Boris desparate if he did the same thing?