Honey Honey

Wrong. The government supports the WA with the EU backed by the Irish government. Parliament rejects it. Key difference. Evidence of disdain for Ireland in the purpose for WA's failure is sketchy at best.

Birmingham's vote was only 50.4% leave. When you add 250k of surrounding areas for Liverpool and Manchester to match the population sizes the result will gravitate to a very similar outcome. Birmingham isn't an odd one out. As for London, it is in effect a super size version of inner cities elsewhere in the country. Geography isn't a very good predictor of vote and there's little evidence to suggest it has cultural impact within England or Wales.

It might not be that different. Digging a little deeper, Birmingham as a city, in terms of giving a result under that name, was based on around 450,000 votes. Liverpool on the other hand as a city giving its result was based on 200,000 votes. Manchester similarly gave it's result as 200,000 voters. Clearly the boundary of Birmingham is encapsulating substantially more and that may be distorting the result comparison. One thing common in all metro areas is that the suburbs were more likely to vote leave. The difference is not a surprise as there has been a significant demographic and social change in city centres with the rapid expansion of universities and service sector work. I don't think the result given as Birmingham concludes for sure that it is somehow a truly distinct place.

This isn't true of metropolitan areas. It's true of the smaller inner city boundaries within a metropolitan area. If you look at the metropolitan then 7 of the 10 borough's of Greater Manchester voted leave. 5 of the 8 districts of Merseyside voted leave. 22 of Birmingham's 40 wards voted leave. 5 of London's 33 borough's voted leave.

This reminds me of those times as a kid when the bank or a local business would match whatever the school fun day raised for charity

Fair play mate. Maybe it could be interpeted that way but that is not intentional and would be the wrong way to look at it. What was going on and is going on warrants frank and detailed discussion and shouldn't in my opinion be degraded by those who are just looking for nothing other than to gloat. The loss of life or social tragedy is not a pawn and gloating about it is unbecoming. At least in the immediate moment the victims deserve to have their situation treat in the fullest of intellectual examination rather than having a verified twitter account post "Socialism fails again" to get likes and laughs or some other low hanging fruit of a quip. Hence the comment that it is not really the time for that. It might have its use and place but it certainly isn't when minds should be focused on detail. So whilst you see the post as a diversion it is actually about the opposite, it's about mopping up what is being passed as debate when it clearly isn't intellectual at all, rather it's childish. For that reason it is a coincidence that it might look similar to bullet dodging. The important thing to remember is what specifically is the context in which the comment arises. The exact same words can be very different in a different context.

There's no need to tell someone to fuck off and call them scum. On your points, you are quoting a post from a year ago. I'm happy to defend my opinion. Fairy admitted himself he was being smug at first. I equated that with what was common in the right wing coverage at the time. Anyone around then will have seen the trend, particularly on social media. Fairy even then admitted he shouldn't be smug, but it is I curiously who is on the end of your wrath. Nowhere did I say we shouldn't have political debate or that we should stop to pray. It was my opinion that at the time the crisis peaked if all someone had to contribute to this was one-up behaviour on their own domestic opponents then they shouldn't bother at all. If you go further down the thread last year you will also see a Ken Livingstone joke. There's no excuse for playing cultural ignorance here, Fairy posted an article about Ken Livingstone defending Maduro so you can see what he is about. After a few members made what could be interpreted as excuses for Maduro I joked that Ken Livingstone had a few accounts on this forum. Still you frame it as if I somehow can't bring myself to say "an evil socialist dictatorship is to blame", I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion from the evidence before you. The errors in your post are the product of rushing in too quick and the tone of fuck off and scum is a mist descending that warrants retraction.

Wouldn't work either mate. You have to negotiate with the EU which means give and take on red lines. That give and take would do exactly as what is happening now in the parliamentary arithmetic and cause deadlock. What would be needed is a political party with a strong majority whose purpose is to leave and who are willing to walk away from the table and take no deal. If there was a plan in the referendum then it would still require politicians who don't agree with it, believe it or who didn't put it forward going along with it.

You didn't address any of the philosophical arguments. Why? If we follow the logic of your enough proof the EU doesn't possess the competencies and trappings traditionally reserved for the nation state, then the United Kingdom also isn't a nation state because some Scottish people would cry if Scotland became independent from rUK. So just who is a nation state? That goes back to the philosophical arguments you ignored. The philosophy without the identity does not hold obedience. As you are seeing across Europe. Once you understand the philosophy and then recognise existence and obedience you can connect the dots of identity and the importance of attachment.

"All" is your word. I used the word foundation. Identity also does matter. It's the central tenant of social cohesion.

Core competencies in that something can be decided at a European level which cannot be vetoed by a member state, with the ECJ having supremacy of law. This is the difference with the single market where a veto is possible and a dispute court which is non-binding. The future remains the competency of the nation state. EU members are increasingly glorified local councils and will continue to have political movements calling to cede power to the centre. Especially those in the €urozone. The identities of a nation state are evident outside of parliament everyday. There are people there with EU flags, people who feel a connection, a pride and a shared identity. All of the psychological trappings of national identity. The EU itself is to spend billions trying to cultivate this emotional belonging. Some people cried after the referendum result because of a sense of lost identity. No one cried because multilateral trade agreements would be hard to replicate. The foundation of continuity remain is built on this emotional bondage. People marching the streets professing their identity. This was cultivated over time through the symbolism of the European Union project. The very word European is itself a loaded name.

The use of trade bloc, economic and political union obfuscates, either deliberately or not, that the EU possesses some core competencies and identities traditionally reserved for the nation state. Economic and political union could be used to describe or deny the existence of every single country on earth.

The single market is a trade bloc not the EU. I can't be bothered going into detail on the competencies and trappings of the EU which are above and beyond just a trade agreement. The flag, the anthem, the army, the identity. This isn't NAFTA of EFTA. It also does a disservice to what people are trying to build with the EU. There is nothing in a Samsung product that can only be provided by a single country. It's just not relevant to the modern world.

The wider UK is intertwined with far more than just one country so the shock would only be felt at a micro level in smaller communities whose ability to absorb said shock would be dependent on its own local economies diversification or the wider economies ability to create alternative opportunities. It happens on a daily basis outside of your trade hypothetical, jobs come and go with technological disruption. There would also be a hit to Samsung's market capitalisation and it would be weakened against it's international competitors.

You'll have to elaborate on the difference between by a country and in a country.

I believe member states parliaments did not have a veto over the EU - Japan deal that comes into force this year. It is therefore not multilateral. EU member states cannot create trade agreements which impact laws the EU has supremacy over and they cannot veto trade agreements the EU creates which do not impact domestic laws for which the member state has supremacy over. The EU is not a trade bloc, it has multiple competencies of a state.

Who is trying to do that then? Even no deal is posited as a strategy to bring about trade negotiation.

Adam Smith died a few centuries ago lads The west has moved on from specialisation to highly complex diversification in a global supply chain operation of goods, services and capital. In fact in the mobile phone of every member on here there is most likely a part created or designed in the UK. Complex products don't come from singular countries quite like wine does. The German trade surplus calculation is distorted by the stage in the global supply chain which they sit, rather than specialisation itself. The value added doesn't filter down to ordinary people very well but is mainly redistributed back out across the world to shareholders and non-manufacturing aspects of a business model. For example, if it takes 3 widgets to make a car, 1 widget from Slovakia costing €1000, 1 widget from Italy costing €1000 and 1 widget from Brazil costing €1000 that is an import cost calculated at €3000. The car plant, based in Germany, sticks the 3 widgets together and sends it to Russia for €10000. The trade surplus or value added in Germany is then calculated at €7000. Does this money filter down into the local economy of the car plant? Little. The shareholders from Japan, Dubai, Australia all around the world take their cut. The hedge funds from the UK, the pension funds from the Netherlands. Then the company takes its value added money and spends it in Russia on advertising, on opening a salesroom, providing car finance. The tentacles of globalisation are too complex for the old fashioned business view of seeing everything in terms of national borders. It might have been that way before Margaret Thatcher and co around the world abolished capital controls but money is now recycled in myriad ways creating a system that keeps fuelling itself. Dyson are moving 2 people to Singapore. They haven't manufactured in the UK for over a decade and I might be wrong but I don't think has even paid corporation tax here for years. The role the UK plays in the globalised economic process of a Dyson product is the value added by the 3000 strong engineering design plant, the investments made there and the gainful employment there, that is what impacts the local economy. Any left wing government worth its salt would indirectly make trading with its economy harder by passing progressive laws and taxes that improve human rights, workers rights, animal rights and the enviornment. Trade deals aren't so much about swapping bananas for pottery in the Adam Smith conception of it anymore. It is far more complex now. "Good" trade deals are about the facilitation of more transactions given that governments rightly or wrongly judge an economy by a value of all its transactions.

I guess it would always be in the back of your mind that you are enabling a human rights abuser. However I'm sure we'd find the excuses or ignore it like everyone does when they buy Mike Ashley's sweatshop child labour made £2 twelve pack Donnay socks

"sorry lads I tried"

Two big revelations this week. Firstly it has been revealed in court that years ago the Mike Ashley blew the chance to sell the club to the now owners of Man City by making insulting remarks about Islam, the Dubai royal family and Kevin Keegan. The Times have revealed today that Dennis Wise is working as an advisor for Mike Ashley. He has not only met club hierarchy to offer advice but he has also been asking his contacts to make pro-Ashley statements in the media.

Finished this at the weekend I find Tim Marshall is good at relaying facts about the environment we live in. Prisoners of Geography is a great book. This one too is good it tells you the borders that exist, why, who believes what etc around the world. The downside however is that in his last chapter or two he turns to Brexit and the book suddenly becomes more about his philosophy and what should be done to heal the divides. The book goes from facts to something very different. It's not remain or leave it's just yet another take on what Britain needs. Every man and his dog has an opinion on that, it's not book worthy. Now I am about 80 pages into Yanis Varoufakis account of dealing with the establishment that turned the Greek recession into a depression and a debt colony.

The club's hierarchy loved Pardew right up to the very end. I'm guessing it's just the team who interview players for the website and run the social media accounts.