FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Phillip Hammond
Phillip Hammond
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with "The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017. | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017. "And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour. https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April. In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next. The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year. In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017. https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017.
And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April.
In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next.
The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
"So it revised a 2% growth forecast to a 1.7% growth forecast. That is still positive growth forecast territory. Your remain campaign bullshit project fear propaganda forecast that the UK would go into recession in the year 2017 if the country voted Leave has failed to materialise. | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017.
And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April.
In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next.
The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
So it revised a 2% growth forecast to a 1.7% growth forecast. That is still positive growth forecast territory. Your remain campaign bullshit project fear propaganda forecast that the UK would go into recession in the year 2017 if the country voted Leave has failed to materialise. "Well then Einstein please provide any posts were any of the people supporting remain predicted that there will be a recession because ive never said it and i cant recall seeing any other posts....in fact i feel that if we did go into recession it would be disaratious for us and the UK and thats something id never wish as it would mean more austerity for the people who can least afford it | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017.
And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April.
In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next.
The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
So it revised a 2% growth forecast to a 1.7% growth forecast. That is still positive growth forecast territory. Your remain campaign bullshit project fear propaganda forecast that the UK would go into recession in the year 2017 if the country voted Leave has failed to materialise.
Well then Einstein please provide any posts were any of the people supporting remain predicted that there will be a recession because ive never said it and i cant recall seeing any other posts....in fact i feel that if we did go into recession it would be disaratious for us and the UK and thats something id never wish as it would mean more austerity for the people who can least afford it "The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017.
And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April.
In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next.
The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
So it revised a 2% growth forecast to a 1.7% growth forecast. That is still positive growth forecast territory. Your remain campaign bullshit project fear propaganda forecast that the UK would go into recession in the year 2017 if the country voted Leave has failed to materialise.
Well then Einstein please provide any posts were any of the people supporting remain predicted that there will be a recession because ive never said it and i cant recall seeing any other posts....in fact i feel that if we did go into recession it would be disaratious for us and the UK and thats something id never wish as it would mean more austerity for the people who can least afford it
The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. "Facts please not just hot air | |||
"So ive just watched an interview with Phillip Hammond our Chancellor of the Exchequer. He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. Others on here thinks all in the garden is rosy....im wondering what excuses they will come up with
The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017.
And thats downgraded from the start of the year ...see the link...see i do as others provide the facts behind these words... we just dont pluck them from thin air
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
In a summer update to its twice yearly forecasts, the fund said the UK economy was slowing and likely to grow only 1.7 per cent this year, down 0.3 percentage points from its forecast in April.
In contrast, the eurozone is expected to outperform the UK this year, growing 1.9 per cent, the IMF said. But it cut its forecast for the US to 2.1 per cent for this year and next.
The IMF upgraded its forecasts for the growth of the world economy to 3.5 per cent this year and 3.6 per cent in 2018, both up from 3.2 per cent last year.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, the IMF initially cut its 2017 forecast hard but then changed its mind when the UK continued to post strong economic data in the second half of 2016, raising its estimate to 2 per cent for 2017.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ebf7170-703d-11e7-aca6-c6bd07df1a3c
So it revised a 2% growth forecast to a 1.7% growth forecast. That is still positive growth forecast territory. Your remain campaign bullshit project fear propaganda forecast that the UK would go into recession in the year 2017 if the country voted Leave has failed to materialise.
Well then Einstein please provide any posts were any of the people supporting remain predicted that there will be a recession because ive never said it and i cant recall seeing any other posts....in fact i feel that if we did go into recession it would be disaratious for us and the UK and thats something id never wish as it would mean more austerity for the people who can least afford it
The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong.
Facts please not just hot air "It is fact if you know how to use Google it is easily checked.  | |||
| |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. " Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong  | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong "Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign. "Quote from Phillip Hammond He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50. He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
"
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017? | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?"Yes and | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and "So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?"Yes that means we are now a month into the 3rd quarter. The ONS have released the growth figures for the first 2 quarters of the year so far, both have been in positive growth territory with no sign of recession anywhere in sight. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then. "There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet. "He seems to know a lot more our Centuar than the UK Chancellor  | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet. "You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong. It is still 2017. So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet.
You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong.
It is still 2017.
So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid."The IMF made a prediction/forcast on Monday that the UK economy would grow by 1.7% this year. Isn't it you remainers who keep saying we should listen to the likes of the IMF? Or are they not to be trusted now? Jeez make your mind up. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet.
You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong.
It is still 2017.
So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid.
The IMF made a prediction/forcast on Monday that the UK economy would grow by 1.7% this year. Isn't it you remainers who keep saying we should listen to the likes of the IMF? Or are they not to be trusted now? Jeez make your mind up. "Beep. Deflection. Logic fail. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet.
You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong.
It is still 2017.
So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid.
The IMF made a prediction/forcast on Monday that the UK economy would grow by 1.7% this year. Isn't it you remainers who keep saying we should listen to the likes of the IMF? Or are they not to be trusted now? Jeez make your mind up.
Beep. Deflection. Logic fail."'Beep' was that your alarm going? Ah bless it's past your bedtime. Time to take your medication and go to sleep.  | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet.
You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong.
It is still 2017.
So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid.
The IMF made a prediction/forcast on Monday that the UK economy would grow by 1.7% this year. Isn't it you remainers who keep saying we should listen to the likes of the IMF? Or are they not to be trusted now? Jeez make your mind up.
Beep. Deflection. Logic fail.
'Beep' was that your alarm going? Ah bless it's past your bedtime. Time to take your medication and go to sleep. "Beep. Deflection turned into personal attack. Double logic fail. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes and
So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then.
There is no crystal ball gazing involved when looking back at the first 2 quarters as the ONS have already released the growth figures for those. We are only a month into the 3rd quarter so the 3rd quarter figures won't be release for another 2 or 3 months yet.
You have claimed the prediction of recession in 2017 is wrong.
It is still 2017.
So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid.
The IMF made a prediction/forcast on Monday that the UK economy would grow by 1.7% this year. Isn't it you remainers who keep saying we should listen to the likes of the IMF? Or are they not to be trusted now? Jeez make your mind up. "They also predicted a recession last year after brexit for this year...take note also of the remainers having a go at the IMF which again proves you just make shite up I quote Leaving the EU would hit British living standards, stoke inflation and wipe up to 5.5% off GDP, the International Monetary Fund has warned with less than a week to go until the referendum. The IMF used its annual report on the British economy to say Brexit would plunge the UK into recession next year and that it could see no economic advantage in leaving the EU. IMF chief urges Britain to stay in Europe Read more Previous IMF interventions have drawn an angry response from leave campaigners who have already said the fund should not interfere in the UK’s democratic process. The leave camp has also attacked its record on economic forecasting. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum | |||
"The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017. " So let's see if I have this right... The economy is growing at 1.7% so everything is OK and its all fearmongering... Funny that... By its lowest measure inflation is running at near 3% and rising (the true figure probably being closer to 10% but we will take the lowest measure for your benefit). 1.7-3=-1.3% so the reality is the economy is shrinking (and has been since the 70's and the introduction a Keynesian economic theory and trickle down economics) as proven by the relentless fall in value of the £ and the continual rise in systemic national debt that has been accelerated by the brexit vote. But everything is fine, we have no need to worry, the USA will supply us with 'good ol wholesome food' like chicken in a can... https://youtu.be/V5Xkg8FsVtY enjoy!  | |||
| |||
"The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017. So let's see if I have this right... The economy is growing at 1.7% so everything is OK and its all fearmongering... Funny that... By its lowest measure inflation is running at near 3% and rising (the true figure probably being closer to 10% but we will take the lowest measure for your benefit). 1.7-3=-1.3% so the reality is the economy is shrinking (and has been since the 70's and the introduction a Keynesian economic theory and trickle down economics) as proven by the relentless fall in value of the £ and the continual rise in systemic national debt that has been accelerated by the brexit vote. But everything is fine, we have no need to worry, the USA will supply us with 'good ol wholesome food' like chicken in a can... https://youtu.be/V5Xkg8FsVtY enjoy! "So what you're saying is that since the 70s our economy has been shrinking? | |||
"The UK economy is still growing. The IMF forecast released on Monday for the UK economy this year is 1.7% growth. A far cry from the Remain campaign Project fear scaremongering last year when they wrongly predicted a vote to leave would see the UK in recession in the year 2017. So let's see if I have this right... The economy is growing at 1.7% so everything is OK and its all fearmongering... Funny that... By its lowest measure inflation is running at near 3% and rising (the true figure probably being closer to 10% but we will take the lowest measure for your benefit). 1.7-3=-1.3% so the reality is the economy is shrinking (and has been since the 70's and the introduction a Keynesian economic theory and trickle down economics) as proven by the relentless fall in value of the £ and the continual rise in systemic national debt that has been accelerated by the brexit vote. But everything is fine, we have no need to worry, the USA will supply us with 'good ol wholesome food' like chicken in a can... https://youtu.be/V5Xkg8FsVtY enjoy!
So what you're saying is that since the 70s our economy has been shrinking?"Funny that since the 70's was when we also joined the EU. | |||
"So what you're saying is that since the 70s our economy has been shrinking? Funny that since the 70's was when we also joined the EU. " JandS66: Yep, since the 70's the economy has been shrinking. Once upon a time (up until thatcher's 'greed is good' 80's) the ' financial services industry' (which is not an industry. [Industry, definition: economic activity concerned with the processing of raw materials and manufacture of goods in factories.]) It was described as invisible earnings because the reality was (and is) all it does is skim from the top of real industry and so does not make anything. Now nearly 90% of our economy is made up of 'invisible earnings' that can be completely transferred out of this country in a matter of seconds. All you need to do is open an office, install a server and transfer the files and operations from here to wherever anywhere in the world and it is gone! that is not an industry! And when that is stripped out of the UK economy we are effectively bankrupt! We are a sea going trading island with foundations of coal that imports coal from Poland and Russia and no longer builds ships! FFS what little manufacturing we have is owned by foreign countries, even our railways are run by and for the profit and benefit of foreign countries! Our economy is as hollow as our Army of 80,000 men and women! | |||
| |||
"Centaur: I know you like to blame the EU for everything, but the two are not linked in the way you think. Our problems are of our own making. In fact the EU has been doing much to shore up our failing economy by providing grants to the most deprived areas of the UK that have been neglected and allowed to decay by successive tory governments. Come April 2019 and all the targeted EU regional infrastructure investment money dries up everyone outside London and the South East will be in for a really unpleasant awakening as the realities of brexit start to bite. Then centaur you will wake up to the fact that your great demon of the EU was really your guardian angel and that the real villains are successive tory governments and their torylite alternative of tone." Yet the country, once again, rejected the chance of a hard left Goverment. | |||
"Centaur: I know you like to blame the EU for everything, but the two are not linked in the way you think. Our problems are of our own making. In fact the EU has been doing much to shore up our failing economy by providing grants to the most deprived areas of the UK that have been neglected and allowed to decay by successive tory governments. Come April 2019 and all the targeted EU regional infrastructure investment money dries up everyone outside London and the South East will be in for a really unpleasant awakening as the realities of brexit start to bite. Then centaur you will wake up to the fact that your great demon of the EU was really your guardian angel and that the real villains are successive tory governments and their torylite alternative of tone." You mean, grants out of our contributions? | |||
"Yet the country, once again, rejected the chance of a hard left Goverment." Hard left! You are so brainwashed it is unbelievable! Here is an excerpt from a speech given in the HoC, have a read and tell me how far left it is. Then I will tell you who made it and when. (I have removed a few bits so you will not be able to tell when it was made.): First, there was a [removed] to undertake not to increase prices of manufacturers over the next 12 months, except where unavoidable, and then only as little as possible. The intention was that the increase in the price of manufactured goods should not exceed X per cent. on average over the 12 months. Then there was the Government’s request to the nationalised industries generally to limit their price increases to an average of X per cent. Thirdly, there were the undertakings by the large majority of the British retail trade to reflect this restraint and to hold their gross percentage margins at no more than current levels. Further, the food distributors had offered to collaborate with the Government in a system of maximum retail prices for certain foodstuffs. Maximum prices for a number of manufactured foodstuffs were to be increased only if a tripartite monitoring body agreed In relation to goods other than food, the remainder of the retail trade agreed not to increase their cash margins on individual items by more than X per cent. without the approval of the monitoring body. Fourthly, the Government agreed to consider taking action to limit prices where they had the ability to influence them. The general intention thus was that the rise in retail prices attributable to the rise in domestic costs should not exceed X per cent. over the 12 months. We also envisaged the possibility of action to limit or offset price increases arising from other causes. There were further proposals designed to provide and protect an improvement in the living standards of wage and salary earners, particularly those on low pay. The flat rate increase of X proposed by the Government would have allowed average earnings to rise by over X per cent. For those on or below X a week it would have allowed increases of X per cent. or more, and thus an appreciable improvement of living standards. [removed] agreements were also proposed, to allow additional increases of pay if towards the end of the year, because of certain special factors, the rise in the retail price index exceeded X per cent. These would provide a safeguard for all wage earners. I repeat that the effect of these proposals was, for anyone earning up to about X a week, not merely to protect but actually to improve living standards, while at the same time reducing the rise of inflation. | |||
"You mean, grants out of our contributions?" Maybe, but the point is they were needed because successive tory governments refused to invest anywhere outside the south east with the exception of Liverpool, but that was driven by the toxteth riots of 81. Of course the present tory government have already told many deprived areas that after brexit that they will not be getting government funding to replace what they will lose from the EU and where they will get funding it will be drastically reduced. | |||
" The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. Is there a specific number of times you need it explained to you that the recession prediction was based on Cameron saying that he would absolutely trigger A50 the day after the referendum? Because you've been harping on about the recession prediction for months and every time its explained to you that Cameron not following through majorly changed the facts. Should I get out the crayons and draw you a picture to help explain it? Because you dont seem to get it no matter that its explained again and again and again and again. Its almost like youre being deliberately wrong
Article 50 had nothing to do with It. Maybe you need it writing in chalk on a big board in order for you to understand. The prediction of recession was based on a vote to leave there was nothing added about the triggering of article 50. Once again for clarity because you still don't seem to get it, the predictions of recession have turned out to be 100% wrong. It was nothing but scaremongering bullshit from the remain campaign.
Quote from Phillip Hammond
He says the lowest growth since 2012 in our Economy is due mainly down to the vote and triggering artical 50.
He said that im not making it up he actually said it..... what do you want it putting on the side of a bus
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017?
Yes that means we are now a month into the 3rd quarter. The ONS have released the growth figures for the first 2 quarters of the year so far, both have been in positive growth territory with no sign of recession anywhere in sight. "Erm 0.3 growth, housing market slowing , car market slowing Yes no where near | |||
"The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. " _bandjam91 wrote... "correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017? So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then." Centaur wrote... "There is no crystal ball gazing involved" _bandjam91 wrote... " So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid" Centaur wrote... " Jeez make your mind up" Fucking comedy genius Centaur, you ARE the gift that just keeps giving 
You really should be on the UK Brexit negotiations team, your logic would have Michel Barnier so confused we might actually get a good deal  | |||
"Centaur wrote... The IMF and the official Remain campaign during the EU referenfum in 2016 both forecast the UK would go into recession in 2017 if the country voted leave. Both wrong. _bandjam91 wrote... correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there still 5 months left in 2017? So Centaur has his crystal ball-sack out again then. Centaur wrote... There is no crystal ball gazing involved _bandjam91 wrote... So you are either crystal ball-sack gazing or stupid Centaur wrote... Jeez make your mind up Fucking comedy genius Centaur, you ARE the gift that just keeps giving
You really should be on the UK Brexit negotiations team, your logic would have Michel Barnier so confused we might actually get a good deal "Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on "Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving. | |||
| |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving."Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless. Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine. Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters? Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving.
Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless.
Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine.
Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters?
Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better "I will be popping the champagne in march 2019 because that is when the article 50 process comes to an end and will be an important milestone. Also we can still leave without a deal in march 2019 and trade on WTO terms with the EU I'd be more than happy with that outcome if it comes down to it. It depends how the ongoing negotiations develop? The EU are shitting themselves at the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal because then the UK will legally not be obliged to pay a single penny upon leaving. Several leading figures on the EU side including EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier have openly admitted the UK leaving without a deal would be disasterous for the EU with the sudden sharp loss of UK funding. If there is a deal and a transition I'll also be popping the champagne again at the end of the 3 year transition when we are finally rid of the EU for good. | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving."This guy is classic he should be on stage....not only do the tories want the cake but they want to eat it as well..... or will it be a case of not me gov not my fault it all went tits up | |||
| |||
"No ones shitting themselves on the EU side. We're the ones controlling the pace at which talks proceed. We decide when progress is made and we have the well prepared and competent negotiating team. If we were desperate for a deal then we'd be negotiating differently. The UKs net contribution is £8.6bn less £1bn given direct to UK companies less £1bn of foreign aid we pay on your behalf. The EU annual budget is €145bn/£130bn. I think we'll survive." Or 350m per week to the NHS | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving."Thing is "Remainers" are not having to compromise on anything, their vote counts for nothing now, it's Leave voters that are having to compromise. Remainers can just sit back and watch this car crash slowly unfold. | |||
"Yet the country, once again, rejected the chance of a hard left Goverment. Hard left! You are so brainwashed it is unbelievable! Here is an excerpt from a speech given in the HoC, have a read and tell me how far left it is. Then I will tell you who made it and when. (I have removed a few bits so you will not be able to tell when it was made.): First, there was a [removed] to undertake not to increase prices of manufacturers over the next 12 months, except where unavoidable, and then only as little as possible. The intention was that the increase in the price of manufactured goods should not exceed X per cent. on average over the 12 months. Then there was the Government’s request to the nationalised industries generally to limit their price increases to an average of X per cent. Thirdly, there were the undertakings by the large majority of the British retail trade to reflect this restraint and to hold their gross percentage margins at no more than current levels. Further, the food distributors had offered to collaborate with the Government in a system of maximum retail prices for certain foodstuffs. Maximum prices for a number of manufactured foodstuffs were to be increased only if a tripartite monitoring body agreed In relation to goods other than food, the remainder of the retail trade agreed not to increase their cash margins on individual items by more than X per cent. without the approval of the monitoring body. Fourthly, the Government agreed to consider taking action to limit prices where they had the ability to influence them. The general intention thus was that the rise in retail prices attributable to the rise in domestic costs should not exceed X per cent. over the 12 months. We also envisaged the possibility of action to limit or offset price increases arising from other causes. There were further proposals designed to provide and protect an improvement in the living standards of wage and salary earners, particularly those on low pay. The flat rate increase of X proposed by the Government would have allowed average earnings to rise by over X per cent. For those on or below X a week it would have allowed increases of X per cent. or more, and thus an appreciable improvement of living standards. [removed] agreements were also proposed, to allow additional increases of pay if towards the end of the year, because of certain special factors, the rise in the retail price index exceeded X per cent. These would provide a safeguard for all wage earners. I repeat that the effect of these proposals was, for anyone earning up to about X a week, not merely to protect but actually to improve living standards, while at the same time reducing the rise of inflation. " As pay restraint by government was done in the 70's I'd say either Heath's government or Callahan's. As you're trying to prove current Labour policies are not particularly left wing, I'll put my money on Heath. | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving.
Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless.
Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine.
Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters?
Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better
I will be popping the champagne in march 2019 because that is when the article 50 process comes to an end and will be an important milestone. Also we can still leave without a deal in march 2019 and trade on WTO terms with the EU I'd be more than happy with that outcome if it comes down to it. It depends how the ongoing negotiations develop? The EU are shitting themselves at the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal because then the UK will legally not be obliged to pay a single penny upon leaving. Several leading figures on the EU side including EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier have openly admitted the UK leaving without a deal would be disasterous for the EU with the sudden sharp loss of UK funding. If there is a deal and a transition I'll also be popping the champagne again at the end of the 3 year transition when we are finally rid of the EU for good. "If there is a transitional deal it will because even the utter morons in power have realised that flouncing off with no deal will be a catastrophe. Even hardline idiots like Fox and Gove understand that. Dont worry, by the end of the process you wont be drinking champagne, you'll not be able to afford to buy it. Can i recommend some english sparkling wine instead? That'd be financially prudent and also very patriotic. | |||
"As pay restraint by government was done in the 70's I'd say either Heath's government or Callahan's. As you're trying to prove current Labour policies are not particularly left wing, I'll put my money on Heath." Pay restraint was not just a 70's phenomenon, but that is not really relevant here. However you are absolutely correct in your deductions, it is a speech given by Ted Heath when he was PM, when explaining the thinking behind the Threshold Agreement. And regardless of who gave it the ideas and ethos behind the concept were much more left wing than anything being proposed by JC and Labour today. So when it is realised that this was right wing conservative government policy 40 years ago it is plain that nothing proposed today is 'hard left' policy but that the politics has been moved so far to the right that many now consider what is in reality fascism as mainstream centre right policies. | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving.
Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless.
Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine.
Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters?
Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better
I will be popping the champagne in march 2019 because that is when the article 50 process comes to an end and will be an important milestone. Also we can still leave without a deal in march 2019 and trade on WTO terms with the EU I'd be more than happy with that outcome if it comes down to it. It depends how the ongoing negotiations develop? The EU are shitting themselves at the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal because then the UK will legally not be obliged to pay a single penny upon leaving. Several leading figures on the EU side including EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier have openly admitted the UK leaving without a deal would be disasterous for the EU with the sudden sharp loss of UK funding. If there is a deal and a transition I'll also be popping the champagne again at the end of the 3 year transition when we are finally rid of the EU for good.
If there is a transitional deal it will because even the utter morons in power have realised that flouncing off with no deal will be a catastrophe. Even hardline idiots like Fox and Gove understand that.
Dont worry, by the end of the process you wont be drinking champagne, you'll not be able to afford to buy it. Can i recommend some english sparkling wine instead? That'd be financially prudent and also very patriotic."I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals. | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving.
Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless.
Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine.
Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters?
Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better
I will be popping the champagne in march 2019 because that is when the article 50 process comes to an end and will be an important milestone. Also we can still leave without a deal in march 2019 and trade on WTO terms with the EU I'd be more than happy with that outcome if it comes down to it. It depends how the ongoing negotiations develop? The EU are shitting themselves at the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal because then the UK will legally not be obliged to pay a single penny upon leaving. Several leading figures on the EU side including EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier have openly admitted the UK leaving without a deal would be disasterous for the EU with the sudden sharp loss of UK funding. If there is a deal and a transition I'll also be popping the champagne again at the end of the 3 year transition when we are finally rid of the EU for good.
If there is a transitional deal it will because even the utter morons in power have realised that flouncing off with no deal will be a catastrophe. Even hardline idiots like Fox and Gove understand that.
Dont worry, by the end of the process you wont be drinking champagne, you'll not be able to afford to buy it. Can i recommend some english sparkling wine instead? That'd be financially prudent and also very patriotic.
I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals. "Please centaur give me some of what your on it sounds brilliant stuff You should get on the brexit team you would even frighten them to def your talk is utter crap and nonsense but it's so funny I couldn't live without your comedy scetches on here Benny hill springs to mind | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals. "Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France. You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne."What about Korbel Champagne? | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?" Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete. "Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ? Stolen from the guardian Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status? Pork pies coming out of the oven View more sharing options Katy Salter Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law. You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne. Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154. So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side. Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
"I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant. "Priceless cherub absolutely priceless | |||
" Oh and as foot note to all this....im seeing Phillip Hammond is suggesting a transitional period now Fuck me what planets do these people live on
Philip Hammond suggested a 5 year transition ages ago while Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition period. It was on the news this morning that the cabinet had agreed on a 3 year transition period upon exit from the EU. Hammond and the remainers in the cabinet have had to concede the most ground on this 2 years away from what they wanted while the Brexiters in the cabinet are only 1 year away from what they wanted. It's a compromise but the remainers have had to compromise more, learn the lesson from this because you lost the referendum, you are going to have to compromise more than Brexiters all the way through this process of leaving.
Ha ha ha ha ha, priceless.
Not more than a few weeks ago you were confidently talking about popping open champagne in March 2019 for the UK exiting the EU. A few weeks before that you were trying to convince us that the UK had all the leverage in negotiations and that the UK would be able to leave with no deal and it would be just fine.
Now the cabinet has accepted that not only does the UK *have* to get a deal, it also needs a transitional deal for 3 years....and youre trying to claim it as a win for hardline Brexiters?
Sequencing, divorce bill, bank brexodus, transitional deal, the EU/UK supranational court, the acceptance of needing a deal with the EU. The losses are racking up for you Centaur. But please, keep pretending their really wins if it makes you feel better
I will be popping the champagne in march 2019 because that is when the article 50 process comes to an end and will be an important milestone. Also we can still leave without a deal in march 2019 and trade on WTO terms with the EU I'd be more than happy with that outcome if it comes down to it. It depends how the ongoing negotiations develop? The EU are shitting themselves at the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal because then the UK will legally not be obliged to pay a single penny upon leaving. Several leading figures on the EU side including EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier have openly admitted the UK leaving without a deal would be disasterous for the EU with the sudden sharp loss of UK funding. If there is a deal and a transition I'll also be popping the champagne again at the end of the 3 year transition when we are finally rid of the EU for good.
If there is a transitional deal it will because even the utter morons in power have realised that flouncing off with no deal will be a catastrophe. Even hardline idiots like Fox and Gove understand that.
Dont worry, by the end of the process you wont be drinking champagne, you'll not be able to afford to buy it. Can i recommend some english sparkling wine instead? That'd be financially prudent and also very patriotic.
I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals. "So no champagne then, just cheap sparkling new world plonk - classy, rather like the whole brexit clusterfuck. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant. "Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip | |||
| |||
 | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant.
Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip"Why all the insults and bitterness in these forums? Could you enlighten us as to what Champagne is? And I'm not sure what kind of palate you posess but there is Champagne and there is Champagne even from Champagne and most of it tastes like piss | |||
| |||
"Many English wines, including sparkling, are outgunning wines from across the world, including champagne. We much prosecco to champagne, anyway." We much prefer.... | |||
"Many English wines, including sparkling, are outgunning wines from across the world, including champagne. We much prosecco to champagne, anyway." BBC News: Minister calls for Scotch whisky to be defined in law I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it: Minister calls for Scotch whisky to be defined in law - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-40765627 The point is not about what tastes best , it is about preventing sales of UK trademarked foods being reduced further by unregulated copies Currently the European countries can't buy scotch from America but when they leave there is nothing to stop them making or buying cheaper better scotch from Donalds country , | |||
"Many English wines, including sparkling, are outgunning wines from across the world, including champagne. We much prosecco to champagne, anyway. BBC News: Minister calls for Scotch whisky to be defined in law I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it: Minister calls for Scotch whisky to be defined in law - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-40765627 The point is not about what tastes best , it is about preventing sales of UK trademarked foods being reduced further by unregulated copies Currently the European countries can't buy scotch from America but when they leave there is nothing to stop them making or buying cheaper better scotch from Donalds country , " Why do I need to see that? | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant.
Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip"If you had bothered to read the link to the Wikipedia page I put the link to you would see that Korbel Champagne has been used at several American Presidential inaugurations. They are hardly going to use any old 'sparkling crap' as you call it for that are they? Surely only the best will do for a Presidential inauguration. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant.
Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip
Why all the insults and bitterness in these forums?
Could you enlighten us as to what Champagne is? And I'm not sure what kind of palate you posess but there is Champagne and there is Champagne even from Champagne and most of it tastes like piss"When they start to throw around insults it means they've lost the argument, so I just take it as a victory. | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant.
Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip
Why all the insults and bitterness in these forums?
Could you enlighten us as to what Champagne is? And I'm not sure what kind of palate you posess but there is Champagne and there is Champagne even from Champagne and most of it tastes like piss
When they start to throw around insults it means they've lost the argument, so I just take it as a victory. "Talking to an imaginary friend? Just because you choose to call something Champagne doesn't mean it is champagne. What is and isn't champagne is clearly defined whether you like it or not | |||
" I think it be trying some American champagne or some Australian champagne once brexit is complete and we get new trade deals with those countries it'll be cheaper than it is now as will many other products in the shops from all around the rest of the world as we establish new free trade deals.
Presumably you know that champagne can only come from champagne and that champagne is in France.
You could drink a sparkling Californian white or something similar from Australia but you most certainly won't be drinkinking champagne that comes from anywhere other than champagne.
What about Korbel Champagne?
Korbel champagne (or Korbel California champagne) made in the good old US of A. Think I'll order 10 bottles of it to celebrate when Brexit is complete.
Not sure which bit you totally misunderstand ? Champagne can only come from champagne ?
Stolen from the guardian
Britain trails the pack in the number of native foodstuffs protected by law. What would you like to see awarded protected status?
Pork pies coming out of the oven
View more sharing options
Katy Salter
Wednesday 8 August 2012 10.09 EDT
What do Melton Mowbray pork pies, West Country farmhouse cheddar, Whitstable oysters, and Herefordshire cider have in common? Aside from the makings of a great picnic, they all have protected food names, enshrined in EU law.
You've probably noticed an EU symbol on some favourite foods. A red and yellow one indicates a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). This means a product must be made to a traditional recipe, in a certain geographical area, with ingredients from that area. A blue and yellow symbol indicates a Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), which must also be made in a specific region to its traditional recipe, but may include ingredients from further afield. Another mark, the Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) symbol, safeguards the recipe but doesn't specify where a product should be made. And if that's not enough acronyms, the French also have their own scheme, the Appelation D'Originee Contrôllée (AOC), which protects cheeses like Roquefort and Brie de Meaux from paler, less gloriously stinky imitations, and is best known for promoting the fizzy output of a certain region called Champagne.
Britain now has 48 foods with a PDO or PGI. They're dotted across the country, from Jersey Royals in the south to Orkney beef in the north. But we're still trailing our continental cousins. Italy currently has 244 PDOs and PGIs, France 191 and Spain 154.
So how do you get a protected food name? It can be a long and winding road, paved with red tape. "It took us 9½ years to get the PGI," says Mark Muncey of the Cornish Pasty Association, awarded a PGI in March 2011. But the Cornish pasty makers never considered giving up: "People were ripping off the Cornish pasty around the country, using the name but not the standard." Now a Cornish pasty must be made in the county, using just beef, onions, swede, potatoes and seasoning. The pastry must be rough puff, with crimps on the side.
Or perhaps you will be most happy that other countries will now be able to rip off UK trade marked foods , just as China makes rip off land rovers and Bentleys
I'm not sure which bit you totally misunderstand, Korbel California Champagne is the brand name and its made in the USA. The company also makes one called Russia river valley champagne. It seems it needs spelling out to you so here is the Wikipedia page....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korbel_Champagne_Cellars
All that guff you posted from the Guardian about EU protected law is meaningless, as Korbel Champagne is allowed to be called Champagne under USA law. As you pointed out China makes rip offs of other products and will continue to do so it doesn't matter to the Chinese what EU law says or any other country in the world for that matter. EU law is only enforceable within the EU, outside the EU all EU law is frankly irrelevant.
Just because you clearly have neither the wit nor the palate to understand the difference between Champagne and other sparkling crap, doesnt mean that you can redefine what champagne is. Next you'll be telling me that mousetrap is stilton...get a grip
Why all the insults and bitterness in these forums?
Could you enlighten us as to what Champagne is? And I'm not sure what kind of palate you posess but there is Champagne and there is Champagne even from Champagne and most of it tastes like piss
When they start to throw around insults it means they've lost the argument, so I just take it as a victory.
Talking to an imaginary friend? Just because you choose to call something Champagne doesn't mean it is champagne. What is and isn't champagne is clearly defined whether you like it or not"But he doesn't no | |||
"When they start to throw around insults it means they've lost the argument, so I just take it as a victory. "Now that is really funny... So saying that a lot of champagne tastes like piss is throwing around insults... Well hows this for an insult. It is virtually impossible to taste or smell the difference between the most expensive brut (dry) champagnes and cheap dry fizzy cider (which has to be the ultimate in alcoholic piss water). In fact it is only a few years back that (well the 80's) that the head chef and sommelier of One of London's top hotels was found to have a large supply of dry cider, cork press, fake corks, labels and foil which they where using to refill empty champagne bottles which they were then selling in the michelin starred restaurant and throughout the hotel. the only way they were caught was someone working in the hotel blew the whistle on their scam and everything was found when trading standards raided the kitchen. So now you were saying something about losing arguments when insults are thrown. Do you think that maybe the way you dismissed what was said could be seen as insulting? Or is it just a case of your lack of knowledge, poor memory or plain ignorance shining through again? 
| |||
| |||
"Brexit won't happen" Pssst... it's happened  | |||
