By 2050 CPTPP will be 25% of world economy whereas EU will be 10%.

How's that for Little England 

Wouldn't it be fun if the EU struck a FTA with the CPTPP

Maybe the EU could return to just being a group of nations with a universal FTA (bit like a Common Market) who negotiate trade deals with other countries as a single entity?

We could maybe rejoin?

Would anyone prefer living in a tent, aided only by Charities, to a 4 Star hotel with everything provided?.

Would anyone keep their passport knowing that you could be sent back to your safe country?

Would any genuine asylum seeker prefer a dinghy crossing to a RyanAir flight

Does anyone think someone refused a safe route wouldn't still get on a small boat?

The NHS is in crisis because it was led to believe that it's funding was unlimited and became wasteful.

People are starting to wise up to the fact that if we tightened up procurement, stopped Health Tourism, re-dressed work/life balance and part-time working, cancelled Diversity and Inclusion dogma, took out unnecessary management, slashed executive pay, stopped Doctors working Private Practice or going abroad... it wouldn't need any more money.

The workers are 'Goosed' because those who purport to represent them have moved their focus from a class struggle to an identity struggle.

The EU started off as a simple Trading Bloc for nations of similar sized economies.

Then look what happened.

If only I was as clever as you I would have liked to engage in a conversation regarding the influence of the Post-Modernism of Marcuse and Adorno on the contemporary left.

Of maybe the impact of Gramsci's Theory of Cultural Hegemony

....but I'm afraid you'll tie me in knots.

Bet this has come as a bit of a shock to the people claiming the BBC is full of RWNJs.
https://t.co/FZOqAtovva

The thread on taking the knee is a lesson in ignorance, bigotry and self-congratulatory groupthink.

Isn't that the point?

If you promote people because of who they are rather than what they can do then aren't you more likely to get incompetence?

Have you learned nothing form the BBC and NHS?

Or are you just jealous of the lathering?
https://postimg.cc/ct8j5PVh/2b8312f8

Can't see our type of 'socialists' doing anything like that.

Ours are more likely to cut power to 'privileged' white people (even though they're living in Brambles Farm) and 'toxic' men and syphon it to Black activists, 'oppressed' women, and drag queen storytellers.

Never mind the quality, feel the diversity

btw how do I post a picture on here?

She who goeth woketh, goeth broketh.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11863441/Silicon-Valley-Bank-donated-73-MILLION-Black-Lives-Matter.html

So if we have our own dodgepots, why would we want to import more?

Doesn't that just encourage dodgepottery?

Economically inactive, all.

Aye, anonymous and impune.

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/woman-given-strong-words-advice-9735584

How can being economically inactive be good for the economy?

(unless those being economically inactive were particularly bad at their jobs)

Will Smallbone's one to watch.

Rape is one of the few crimes which rarely involves witnesses or evidence.

It's also the only crime I know of which sees any malicious accuser keeping anonymity and impunity from prosecution whilst the accused is paraded in front of the media for any other malicious accuser to sling mud at.

Lineker expressed a view as a private citizen on his own social media accounts.
He did not express his views using any BBC equipment or time.

Where is the problem?

The problem is:-

 Whether you agree with Lineker's views or not the BBC are attacking his freedom of speech.

The BBC has gone tits up these past few years and has lost it's raison d'etre through various scandals (Saville for instance) and it's dive into wokiness.

I stopped paying my license fee two months ago and don't intend to pay it until it returns to the values as described in the BBC Charter.

This is section 7 of Lineker's contract with the BBC. It's absolutely unambiguous about the need to remain politically impartial:

 

7 BBC STANDARDS:

7.1 You acknowledge that the BBC’s reputation for impartiality, integrity, independence and decency (i.e. the “BBC Standards”) is fundamental and agree that Your Contributions and Your activities and conduct, whether carried out for the BBC, for Yourself or for any third party must not compromise, undermine or call into question, or be perceived to compromise or call into question, any of the BBC Standards and must not bring into disrepute the BBC or any BBC content that You are associated with.

The BBC will NEVER return to it's Charter. Feminist, B.L.M, LGBTQIA+, Green activism is too ingrained.
It's all part of Gransci's Long March Through the Institutions.

Also see: Universities, Education, Policing, The Criminal Justice System, the Civil Service etc etc

Lineker should be allowed to say what he wants but we shouldn't have to pay for it.

#DefundTheBBC

The BBC doesnt pay him for his personal tweets, they dont cost license payers a penny. He gets paid by the BBC for being a Sports presenter and he is pretty much the best in the business.

We are mandated to pay for The BBC which is governed by a Charter stipulating balance and impartiality so either:

a, We stop being legally required to pay for it.
b, Lineker stops using his publicly funded status to push his hateful dogma.
or
c, The BBC provide us with equivalent voices with an opposing opinion.

Your opinion on his quality of product is subjective and, unlike the BBC, other opinions are equally valid.

Lineker made a tweet from his personal account. As a freelance sports presenter he is not governed by any BBC impartiality rules

He doesn't rely on being publicly funded. He is very wealthy and contracts his presentation skills to number of commercial media organisations here and overseas.

The BBC has a number of employees who tweet polar opposite views to Lineker. Andrew Neil as I mentioned, Alan Sugar is another one . People should be getting much more upset about Neil as he was interviewing politicians, surely his impartiality is imperative but he is clearly of the right.

Linekers opinions do not compromise his work in anyway so it shouldnt be an issue.

His output is on the BBC and the BBC's output is governed by the impartiality Charter. If I was a contractor for Middlesbrough Council I'd still be covered by their terms of governance. If I shouted racist abuse at someone whist contracting for MBC I'd expect to be sacked.

Whether he's rich or not is irrelevant. His output is still publicly funded.

Andrew Neil is the perfect example. His perceived opinions (whatever they are) didn't dovetail with the BBC's so, unlike Lineker, he doesn't work there any more. His opinions didn't compromise his work hence politicians of all hues avoided contact with him (esp Boris Johnson). Its only an issue to the very thin skinned identitarians and Marxists who get super triggered by celebrities who don't agree with them.

His twitter account is not publicly funded. His twitter account is not BBC output.

Suncontractors to Middlesbrough Council 100% do not have the same terms as MBC

His BBC output is publicly funded,  his twitter account isn't publicly funded, nor are the outputs from his film company or his work on La liga.

I liked Andrew Neil but he is a lifelong tory and spent all his career at the heart of publications trashing labour and cheerleading thhe conservatives. He was still editing the spectator when working on BBC shows.  Right wingers can't see the problem with that, but a sports presenter makes a fairly benign tweet and all of a sudden they are outraged by impartiality...of a sports presenter

He is bound by BBC regulations
Sub-contractors sign a contract with MBC to abide by their Ethics & Standards Policies
He is still bound by BBC regulations.
That'll be why so many Tory MPs swerved him and the BBC terminated his contract.
Comparing people Nazis isn't benign.

This is a win-win situation.

If the Marxists can post what they like then the bias becomes even more obvious and we phase out the Licence fee.

If they are silenced then news output adopts the new broadcaster model ie GBNews v LBC and we phase out the Licence fee.

It's fun watching though.

I always thought they should play that half an hour before every game.

A privatised health service would be far, far better for men.

It opens up a wonderful opportunity for either a brown, lesbian feminist or a activist with a very loud laugh.

#DefundTheBBC

Lineker should be allowed to say what he wants but we shouldn't have to pay for it.

#DefundTheBBC

The BBC doesnt pay him for his personal tweets, they dont cost license payers a penny. He gets paid by the BBC for being a Sports presenter and he is pretty much the best in the business.

We are mandated to pay for The BBC which is governed by a Charter stipulating balance and impartiality so either:

a, We stop being legally required to pay for it.
b, Lineker stops using his publicly funded status to push his hateful dogma.
or
c, The BBC provide us with equivalent voices with an opposing opinion.

Your opinion on his quality of product is subjective and, unlike the BBC, other opinions are equally valid.

Lineker made a tweet from his personal account. As a freelance sports presenter he is not governed by any BBC impartiality rules

He doesn't rely on being publicly funded. He is very wealthy and contracts his presentation skills to number of commercial media organisations here and overseas.

The BBC has a number of employees who tweet polar opposite views to Lineker. Andrew Neil as I mentioned, Alan Sugar is another one . People should be getting much more upset about Neil as he was interviewing politicians, surely his impartiality is imperative but he is clearly of the right.

Linekers opinions do not compromise his work in anyway so it shouldnt be an issue.

His output is on the BBC and the BBC's output is governed by the impartiality Charter. If I was a contractor for Middlesbrough Council I'd still be covered by their terms of governance. If I shouted racist abuse at someone whist contracting for MBC I'd expect to be sacked.

Whether he's rich or not is irrelevant. His output is still publicly funded.

Andrew Neil is the perfect example. His perceived opinions (whatever they are) didn't dovetail with the BBC's so, unlike Lineker, he doesn't work there any more. His opinions didn't compromise his work hence politicians of all hues avoided contact with him (esp Boris Johnson). Its only an issue to the very thin skinned identitarians and Marxists who get super triggered by celebrities who don't agree with them.

Lineker should be allowed to say what he wants but we shouldn't have to pay for it.

#DefundTheBBC

The BBC doesnt pay him for his personal tweets, they dont cost license payers a penny. He gets paid by the BBC for being a Sports presenter and he is pretty much the best in the business.

We are mandated to pay for The BBC which is governed by a Charter stipulating balance and impartiality so either:

a, We stop being legally required to pay for it.
b, Lineker stops using his publicly funded status to push his hateful dogma.
or
c, The BBC provide us with equivalent voices with an opposing opinion.

Your opinion on his quality of product is subjective and, unlike the BBC, other opinions are equally valid.

What I don't get is how can a racist be a victim of racism?

Lineker should be allowed to say what he wants but we shouldn't have to pay for it.

#DefundTheBBC

It's always those who shout 'Racism!' the loudest who are the real racists.

It just goes to show how effective terrorism is if you don't stamp it out.

There's so many examples now of how being afraid to offend Islam has led to some pretty egregious outcomes.

I think Bud Wiser means that Manchester didn't have the right sort of perpetrator or victim.

How can anyone argue against that, nevermind running around called everyone Gammons because they dont agree with you.

A childish, angry, arrogant, racist, terrorism apologist would probably think it's the right thing to do.

To be fair, our angry racist friend said it would set a precedent of stripping someone of their citizenship without trial...it wouldn't.

He also couldn't tell us which crimes she committed in this country to be tried with.

Still banging on about the same old shite -  Rutters the single-issue-obsessive odd-ball

The point is they had to make a new law that generalises the arbitrary removal of citizenship from dual-nationals without the need for trial or even to notify them, in order to get this through

So again, if you think it isn't a bad thing that an authoritarian leaning government has newly acquired powers to render a significant number of it's own citizens stateless without trial or notification then you are an idiot. End of.

Racists never like being outed as racist, They usually become abusive. You're nothing new.

The point is you said that this set a precedent of stripping citizenship without trial. You were wrong...again.

If it's good enough for Keir Starmer then it's good enough for me.

End of (as the children say)

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-labour-starmer-vows-keep-shamima-begum-out

Jack 'Jihadi Jack' Letts was stripped of his British citizenship in 2019 without trial so it's not setting a precedent.

What crimes did she commit in this country which we could try her for?

It' 'baying' rather than 'braying', that's what donkeys do.

You're still a racist.

To be fair that wasn't a precedent for leaving someone stateless as Jack Letts also had Canadian citizenship and Canada said they would not strip him of it.

To be fair, our angry racist friend said it would set a precedent of stripping someone of their citizenship without trial...it wouldn't.

He also couldn't tell us which crimes she committed in this country to be tried with.

"Woke Judiciary" 🤣

GB news bingo!

Exactly. I am arguing with GB News types over some very tired "Gammon" outrage

As we know, it's about angry people flushing red/pink in the face which happens to all races. Believing only white people go redder when angry is actually racist

We also know that although Black people can blush they won't change to a pink colouration because of excess melanin in their skin therefore the term 'Gammon' is a pejorative related to skin colour.

...therefore it's racist

...therefore you're an angry racist

...you may like to refer to yourself as 'Gammon'.

How apt   

'Woke' isn't related to skin colour therefore not racist.

Anyway, I can see you're very angry and you've reached the end of your argument so it's probably best you leave it now.

#StillRacist

Jack 'Jihadi Jack' Letts was stripped of his British citizenship in 2019 without trial so it's not setting a precedent.

What crimes did she commit in this country which we could try her for?

It' 'baying' rather than 'braying', that's what donkeys do.

You're still a racist.

Here comes the racist

If you can't proficiently convey your meaning then that's not my concern.

I'm not a Tory but I do know that the young do tend to be left-leaning. I also know that the young have a tendency to get old and that voting patterns have a tendency to change.

...and young people tend not to vote.

Politics isn't about consensus. If it was there would be no Politics.

Politics is about competing ideas of governance. Collectivism v individualism.

I do agree with your point about most people being ambivalent about it...until it impacts them personally.

The solution would appear to be quite simple.

If you don't think the working-class are: 'very stupid', 'wholly ignorant', 'purely ignorant', 'false believers', 'easily distracted', 'primal', 'foolish', 'uneducated' or 'useful idiots' then don't write it because we will rightly think that that's what you truly believe.

It's symptomatic of a current metropolitan Labour Party sneering at the working-class which created it. Just look at Emily Thornberry... Red walls crumble.

btw  Vote Leave broke electoral laws. Even The Guardian admitted it so you're alone on that one.

See?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/17/vote-leave-broke-electoral-law-and-british-democracy-is-shaken

Also see: Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Madeline McCann

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome

His race-baiting is negated by his comedic contributions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55FW9hw2M-Q&ab_channel=VoiceOfReason

Anyone ever wonder why some poor bloke in Middlesbrough goes missing, his Mental Health and alcohol abuse are openly stated, then his body is found in a beck near Acklam and it never gets more than one day on the front of the Gazette?

RIP Nicola Bulley

I respect your right to call anyone a 'shyster' but unless you can substantiate it, it bears no gravitas. I'd like to know who these extremists are because I can think of nothing to the left of Marxism but I can think of lots to the right of border defenders.

The immigration crisis is due to lack of implementation of Brexit.

Innate mistrust of outsiders perfectly explains Labour supporter's fear, rage and hatred of Tories. It's why they 'other', de-humanise, abuse and demonise them rather than engage. It allows them to refuse to accept that some people feel voting for them is in their best interests.

ID politics is the current raison d'etre of Labour politics. It's why Khan is Mayor of London and Lammy MP of Tottenham. Saying someone is 'obsessed' should stay on the playground.

If it's not what you thought, you wouldn't have written it.

You're doing it again. Right wing think tanks are the same as left-wing think tanks. They similarly believe that they have the best solutions to the county's problems. Because of your demonisation of the 'other' you believe them to be self-serving and something we need to be 'woke' to.

They're actually not evil, they just have different options.

I'd be willing to bet a Working Class bloke from Brambles Farm has more affinity with ex-miner Lee Anderson than Dianne Abbott or David Lammy. The ignorance is not theirs.

Politics hasn't been about wealth, establishment or privilege for a long time. It's about belonging and identity. The left created the Culture Wars via post-modernism and Critical Race/Gender Theories which prioritised victimhood because the current working class simply weren't revolutionary enough for them.

You can't now call them 'fake' just because most people have had enough of Radical Feminism, a Marxist , Drag storytime and Transactivism.

The only connection is that the wealthy, middle-class. establishment are now more likely to be the leftist, woke, road-blocking, statue defacing, care4calais, anti-tory activists.

The problem is that if the WC saw a party offering a viable solution they wouldn't blame the people coming here from safe countries and taking spaces in doctors, dentists, schools, hotels without their families contributing for decades. What else would you expect?

The Tories have been a massive left down, as were Labour before them (and will be again). What comes next is the interesting part.

So glad we've all rejected what is currently called 'Socialism' in favour of a mixed economy but how do we cope with Labour MPs still calling themselves Marxist? Isn't that indicative of an underlying belief system? Isn't it extremism?

Whilst the Nordic Models seem attractive they do reveal a deep-seated resentment which manifests itself in high suicide rates. Also telling is the emergence of The Patriarchy Paradox which renders all that Identity Politics counter-productive for so long.

Talking about IDpols, do you think an average white bloke in Brambles Farm seriously thinks Lammy, Abbott or Phillips give a flying fig about him or his life?

Personally, I think the focus on 'Inequality' is misplaced. If those at the bottom have a good life then I'm not jealous of what those at the top are making. The gap is irrelevant.

What we can see on here again is Labour supporters treating the real working-class an ignorant, ill-educated fools who don't know what they're doing. They do...and that sort of pompous arrogance never wins votes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism