Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
What links Trump's victory and Brexit? - BBC News

Worth a read . I was struck by one sentence.

Few politicians dare tell them that increased automation may take more jobs than immigrants. You can't deport a driverless truck.

Basically if the author believes what underlies this argument that then they should think about the implications of this and where it actually leads as regards the immigration argument.

Which is .... why would any sane person (or politician) want to increase a nation's population with any incomers at all as the implication is that it will be difficult enough to support their own unemployed masses. Why on earth would you want the liability of more people you can never employ.
 
See the Labour MPs ignoring the wishes of the members of their own party over the leadership.

I dont think they are ignoring the wishes of the members. They have accepted albeit reluctantly he is the leader of the party. What they have done is to table a motion of no confidence in him which he convincingly lost. Sadly for their party its going to take a complete crucifiction at a general election for him to realise he aint the man for the job. Until then we will remain a one party nation which isnt good at all.
 
Question;

Why are EU made Mercedes cars cheaper in non EU countries like the USA than they are in Europe?
 
Question;

Why are EU made Mercedes cars cheaper in non EU countries like the USA than they are in Europe?

Possibly the sales tax in the USA is circa 8% and here its 20%?
 
...if they lose you just return to the start and try again until you win!
That notion isn't limited to the "yoofs" though.

It's exactly the same approach adopted by the political establishment when the populace voted against EU Treaties in Ireland & Denmark. Didn't like the result, so asked them to vote again until they got the result they wanted.

Can't see the problem with that :dk:




;) :D
 
Basically if the author believes what underlies this argument that then they should think about the implications of this and where it actually leads as regards the immigration argument.
Which is .... why would any sane person (or politician) want to increase a nation's population with any incomers at all as the implication is that it will be difficult enough to support their own unemployed masses. Why on earth would you want the liability of more people you can never employ.

You are missing the point I feel. Mark Mardell was merely pointing out the reasons for the rise of unemployment are multifaceted . As such there are no easy solutions. The folks you have to be wary of are the ones that suggest there are.
 
You are missing the point I feel. Mark Mardell was merely pointing out the reasons for the rise of unemployment are multifaceted . As such there are no easy solutions. The folks you have to be wary of are the ones that suggest there are.

I'm not.

The author makes an important specific point - but is so blinkered that they miss that the logic actually works against them *badly*.

And IMO the irony demonstrates yet again the BBC liberal supremacist dogma that anybody who questions immigration is either at best thick or at worst a racist.
 
This because our elected officials are out of touch with what those they are supposed to represent actually want.

See the Labour MPs ignoring the wishes of the members of their own party over the leadership.

See moronic journalists and PMs telling us we were idiots for voting to brexit.

I think you are confusing two issues here.

The internal workings of any political party are what the party wants it to be - and this includes how the party's leader is elected. The fact that the Labour party has a complex and sometimes illogical internal system which can cause various odd situations like the one you describe, is entirely an internal party matter.

However, the way Parliament and MPs work is stipulated by centuries of legislation and it is the essence of our Democracy. Which means that the internal issues of any one party do not reflect in any way on our Democratic system as a whole.

In short the shortcomings of the Labour leadership elections system are nor elated to how Parliament or our MPs work.
 
Question;

Why are EU made Mercedes cars cheaper in non EU countries like the USA than they are in Europe?

Possibly the sales tax in the USA is circa 8% and here its 20%?

My experience with the IT industry is that manufacturers simply sell in each market at the price that is 'suitable' for the specific location.

Apple, HP, Dell... the kit all comes from the same factories, yet compare prices between countries and continents and there are clear differences.

I don't think the cost of manufacture is actually a factor for them when determining the pricing in each country.

In the days when agencies helped people order UK-Spec cars in Europe then bring it over here - you could buy any British-made car (Range Rover, Jag, etc) in Europe cheaper than in the UK.

And of course as Alfie said when you compare the US, they don't have our 20% VAT....
 
In what way is representing the views of the majority a shortcoming??

A country had a finite number of citizens.

If the (say) LibDem want to win an election, they can just go across the channel and import a bunch of would LibDem supporters from French.

But within a political party any candidate can simply get his cronies to become party members and vote for him/her.
 
But within a political party any candidate can simply get his cronies to become party members and vote for him/her.

Is this where we have to pretend that all the new party members and all the people who voted for him were just his mates?

Perhaps a more likely explanation is that people want change?
 
Is this where we have to pretend that all the new party members and all the people who voted for him were just his mates?...

Let's take a theoretical scenario.

- There are 100,000 people in favour of candidate A.

- There are 100,000 people in favour of candidate B.

How many of his mates does candidate A need to bring-in as voters in order to win the elections?

The correct answer is: 1.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom