Can First Class Stamps Be Traced
ChatterBank1 min ago
Oh Dear Ge Jezza!
60 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
https:/
He's not going to play unless the only honourable option left (barring a miracle revelation from the EU) is ruled out.
So he knows exactly where he can go with his dopey ideas. Along with the other party leaders who are equally disrespectful to the referendum result and the public who participated.
He's not going to play unless the only honourable option left (barring a miracle revelation from the EU) is ruled out.
So he knows exactly where he can go with his dopey ideas. Along with the other party leaders who are equally disrespectful to the referendum result and the public who participated.
She should have done it in the beginning. But she should also have been firm.
The losers can’t have thier cake and eat it and expect the winners to just lump it but compromises should have happened.
If there hadn’t been so many compromises from the leave perspective the leave voters wouldn’t feel so let down.
The losers can’t have thier cake and eat it and expect the winners to just lump it but compromises should have happened.
If there hadn’t been so many compromises from the leave perspective the leave voters wouldn’t feel so let down.
He was invited to meet with Mrs May tonight but refused unless she immediately dismissed the only legitimate option available. Her deal has been rejected and the EU say there is no room for manoeuvre. Oh, Jeremy Corbyn! The disingenuous old hippie who has the country's best interests at heart - allegedly.
Canary, these threads don’t smear Corbyn. He smears himself.
Canary, these threads don’t smear Corbyn. He smears himself.
If there hadn’t been so many compromises from the leave perspective the leave voters wouldn’t feel so let down///
The leave voters feel let down because the Government will insist that May's deal delivers on the referendum. It does not, because it leaves us tied to the EU indefinitely (which is the current problem) and not keeping us tied was one of the main reasons for the vote to leave.
//The "only legitimate option" is economically incredibly dangerous//
I agree that "incredibly dangerous" is an accurate description of a Corbyn and McDonnell government. I've got evidence for this: Chavez and his successor most recently; socialism passim.
So far the haruspices who predicted economic disaster immediately following the referendum vote for Leave have been been proved wrong in spades. Why do trust the false prophets now, Jim?
You're so much better on physics. And even biochemistry which is not your field.
I agree that "incredibly dangerous" is an accurate description of a Corbyn and McDonnell government. I've got evidence for this: Chavez and his successor most recently; socialism passim.
So far the haruspices who predicted economic disaster immediately following the referendum vote for Leave have been been proved wrong in spades. Why do trust the false prophets now, Jim?
You're so much better on physics. And even biochemistry which is not your field.
// So far the haruspices who predicted economic disaster immediately following the referendum vote for Leave have been been proved wrong in spades. //
I get bored of explaining why this is irrelevant, but it is also worth pointing out that most meaningful economic impact assessments, including the Treasury's, were based on considering the impact over years, not weeks.
There is no credible case that No Deal won't be harmful. This will especially be true if we continue to insist that we will leave on March 29th, and yet keep pursuing other options.
Stick your fingers in your ears if you like. The only thing I'm risking is looking incredibly stupid. And frankly I would welcome that. But ignoring the risks, or scoffing at them, as you and others do, is reckless, because it will pull everyone down with you if you are wrong.
In an earlier thread Naomi said that ultimately the only thing that mattered was whether we ended up out of the EU in the end. It doesn't ruin that to spend a little longer trying to reach a consensus, or take the time needed, to avoid the risks that No Deal entails while still getting to where you want.
I get bored of explaining why this is irrelevant, but it is also worth pointing out that most meaningful economic impact assessments, including the Treasury's, were based on considering the impact over years, not weeks.
There is no credible case that No Deal won't be harmful. This will especially be true if we continue to insist that we will leave on March 29th, and yet keep pursuing other options.
Stick your fingers in your ears if you like. The only thing I'm risking is looking incredibly stupid. And frankly I would welcome that. But ignoring the risks, or scoffing at them, as you and others do, is reckless, because it will pull everyone down with you if you are wrong.
In an earlier thread Naomi said that ultimately the only thing that mattered was whether we ended up out of the EU in the end. It doesn't ruin that to spend a little longer trying to reach a consensus, or take the time needed, to avoid the risks that No Deal entails while still getting to where you want.
As a final note, as grateful as I am of your praise of my scientific ability, I wish you and Jackdaw would stop presenting it as a backhanded compliment. I will comment on what I like. I don't expect you to listen to me, or agree with me, but it's pretty pointless to tell me effectively to shut up in that way. You're a better person than that, v-e.
Which one? If you mean my last post, economic transitions are unpleasant and difficult, and I don't think anyone can honestly be sure it'll be really worth it. If you mean the post before that, then why would I not be frustrated at your repeated attempts to dismiss everything I say as having no value?
