No of course not. He'll be around until Jan. 2025 so people had better get used to him.

 

Well I can see the bright side. Trump will have killed off any chance of Brexit as a world Trade War starts and we have no deals to cut with anyone and are forced to stay in the EU if we want foreign goods and customers for ours....

No of course not. He'll be around until Jan. 2025 so people had better get used to him.

 

What makes you think he'll die in January 2025 out of interest? I thought he was very healthy and 'could live to 200 if he improved his diet'. :wacko:

Well I can see the bright side. Trump will have killed off any chance of Brexit as a world Trade War starts and we have no deals to cut with anyone and are forced to stay in the EU if we want foreign goods and customers for ours....

 

But how on earth could the gov't placate 17m voters if Brexit somehow didn't come off?

But how on earth could the gov't placate 17m voters if Brexit somehow didn't come off?

 

How on Earth can they placate 43million if it does and we all get f***ed?

How on Earth can they placate 43million if it does and we all get f***ed?

 

I guess you've learned too well from me how to avoid answering awkward questions... ;)

NRA at it again...

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/09/nra-files-l...ontrol-law.html

It was only a matter of time before the NRA tried pulling the feminist card to defend its stance of gun control.

 

As I've mentioned before, it is positive to see some baby steps being moved towards a more sensible gun control in America (the bill signed by the Florida Governor includes raising the age of rifles to 21, banning "bump stocks", introducing a waiting period on the sale of guns & makes it easier for police to confiscate guns from at-risk individuals). It'll take a lot of time (slower than one might hope), but as long as this lawsuit fails, at least it is a tiny step in the right direction.

Yes, you can definitely sense that the general direction on gun control is finally changing, albeit at a glacial pace. Of course the NRA aren't going to give up but it is heartening to see them on the back foot for once. Long may it continue!

But how on earth could the gov't placate 17m voters if Brexit somehow didn't come off?

You make the mistake of assuming that all 17 million of them were 100% committed Leavers (and that none of them have died).

You make the mistake of assuming that all 17 million of them were 100% committed Leavers (and that none of them have died).

 

I thought that would be so obvious that it didn't need saying, just like not all 16m Remainers were 100% committed - and they aren't exactly immortal either. :rolleyes:

 

In any case, that's why I said 17m, rather than 17.4m...

Edited March 10, 20187 yr by vidcapper

I thought that would be so obvious that it didn't need saying, just like not all 16m Remainers were 100% committed - and they aren't exactly immortal either. :rolleyes:

 

In any case, that's why I said 17m, rather than 17.4m...

Let's put your theory to the test in a referendum with no lies then.just pure facts.

But how on earth could the gov't placate 17m voters if Brexit somehow didn't come off?

 

But how on earth could the government placate 16million remain voters if Brexit somehow DOES come off?

Let's put your theory to the test in a referendum with no lies then.just pure facts.

 

So no 'Project Fear; either? ;)

 

But how on earth could the government placate 16million remain voters if Brexit somehow DOES come off?

 

By pointing to the referendum result?

So no 'Project Fear; either? ;)

 

Project facts. The government's own facts will suffice.

Project facts. The government's own facts will suffice.

 

But you cannot offer *facts* for events that have yet to happen - only projections & speculation.

 

If it were otherwise, bookmakers would all go bankrupt... :P

But you cannot offer *facts* for events that have yet to happen - only projections & speculation.

 

If it were otherwise, bookmakers would all go bankrupt... :P

 

Impact studies are based on projected knowledge of what has happened in the past crossed with how a change will affect it. All businesses do this. Those that don't go out of business. A "wait and see" approach to business (which is what we are talking about) is a one-way path leading to Carillion where you try and hide the facts and future projections of your income.

 

The government's own projections show we will worse off. Tories running Brexit have provided no evidence or projections to the contrary in 10 years of Brexit mania, only wishful thinkings. Not prepared because they know the facts and they dont like the facts.

Impact studies are based on projected knowledge of what has happened in the past crossed with how a change will affect it. All businesses do this. Those that don't go out of business. A "wait and see" approach to business (which is what we are talking about) is a one-way path leading to Carillion where you try and hide the facts and future projections of your income.

 

The government's own projections show we will worse off. Tories running Brexit have provided no evidence or projections to the contrary in 10 years of Brexit mania, only wishful thinkings. Not prepared because they know the facts and they dont like the facts.

 

I dare say you'd expect me to respond with 'no pain, no gain' here?

I dare say you'd expect me to respond with 'no pain, no gain' here?

We know all about the pain but there is precisely zero evidence of any gain on the horizon.

I suppose if he does manage to secure better relations with North Korea after the talks, that would be one solitary good thing he would do.

I dare say you'd expect me to respond with 'no pain, no gain' here?

 

More like No Brain*, All Pain.

 

(* by which I mean anyone who doesnt have a buisness plan that is updated regularly according to circumstances. Or anyone who thinks one is unnecessary. Or someone who tries to hide accepting a truism by resorting to bland cliches)