Brexit, in or out.

[gavpowell]

But triggering article 50 wipes out legislation,from the EU that has become law in this country( work time directives, pay structures etc etc)that will have to be done with legislation ( to change laws you need new laws)through our parliament, a government just can't decide to do it, especially just off the back of an advisory referendum, otherwise any government who was elected as euro sceptic could just have triggered it at a whim, that's why I think it may have to go through parliament.

No, article 50 merely triggers the notice period that we wish to leave - we then have two years to negotiate the best position possible, or else we leave on the best available terms at the end of the two years.

The various bits of legislation are up for debate but remain in force until we actually leavee 2 years later, though anything that is only European law and not written specifically into UK law is then invalidated unless Parliament decides to keep it and write it into a new act.

Repealing the act would certainly require Parliament to pass(you have to draft a fresh bill to repeal something), but the theory is the Prime Minister can exercise royal prerogative and trigger it, partiularly now that he or she has a mandate from the people.

In any case, Parliament would pass it, as the major parties have said they won't oppose it, so it's a bit of a moot point.

None of the European states have ever had a Eurosceptic government in the past 10 years, so we've never had to find out on that score!

[gavpowell]

Before that, we need a GE anyway,

That's very awkward under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act - you'd have to have the house collude in a rigged vote of no confidence, which is a bit ropey, constitutionally.

Isn't part of the reason for the economic instability all the uncertainty? Delaying even further is probably going to make things worse, no?

We could always try to get back in if it goes wrong - surely we must already satisfy all the requirements for entry, and we'd just need to prevent any of the members vetoing our re-entry?

[vmax4steve]

So now Trump wins in the US election, an anti establishment figure with no political experience campaigning on a nationalist agenda, reality tv star and billionaire who talks straight on his tv show and has done a lot of straight talking during his campaign.

What can be made of this ?

Has the american public voted against the Clinton/Bush political dynasty ?
Have they voted against the globalisation that has seen a significant percentage of their jobs go overseas ?
Have they voted for a non political figure reality tv star who seems to talk straight and means what he says ?
Have they voted against the liberalism of free trade ?
Have they simply chosen the lesser of two evils ?
Are the american public subconsciously more misogynist than racist ?
Have they been duped yet again ?
Should the democrats have nominated Bernie Sanders ?

Trump won easily with the strange electoral college voting system, but the percentage of votes cast was less than 1%, a divided country indeed, just like the UK in the brexit referendum with only a 4% difference.

We shall see what actually happens, but unlike Obama the republicans have control of the House Of Representatives and the Senate so are not constricted in any way, for two years at least.

[GeordieDS]

One thing has become clear in 2016 and that is the world wants change

[DeanH]

"Anti-establishment" - ha!
He has benefited from and has been part of that said-establishment for many many years, and NOW (as of 20th Jan) he will BE the establishment!
"Interesting Times" as Terry Pratchett said :biggrin:

Anti Globalisation? - the Trump business is based on globalisation!

[Terry Davidson]

I think the 'thinking' behind the voting was very similar to Brexit. America, by a 1% margin I note, has voted for change but I just don't think Trump is the President who will bring that change. He will try and dismantle as much of Obama's agenda as possible meaning changing immigration laws, threatening to change treaties which have been around for years like NATO, South Korea, Japan and perhaps even North American defense.

I think the bigger problem is he gets to nominate the Supreme Court vacancy and then it will have a right-wing 5-4 majority which will effect America greatly and also the Republicans have kept their Senate and House majorities which is also sad. He will probably ban any Muslim immigration and perhaps any other immigration. His 'make america strong again' is just a lot of hot air since America is already the strongest it's been in years.

Besides, maybe we'll get lucky and he'll be impeached like Nixon was.

[gavpowell]

So now Trump wins in the US election, an anti establishment figure with no political experience

I love the idea he was "straight talking" - he was talking a lot of bollocks, contradicting himself on a regular basis and somehow has managed to convince a lot of people he's the anti-establishment choice. He is not:

He'a not a career politician, but he's been trying to run for office since the 80s - he was nearly Bush Sr's VP.

He won a couple of primaries with a minor party.

He's bragged about the laws he's influenced.

He's been a massive donor to various political candidates and parties for years.

He's been a member of the Democrats and the Republicans.

He was at the forefront of the conspiracy theory for "Birthers"

He's endorsed candidates and addressed meetings.

He's best of friends with people like Rudy Giuliani.

And of course, he was the official Republican candidate for president.

This isn't some guy who suddenly decided it might be neat to run for President - he's been around and about for decades now.

He's also starting to make me believe in the idea that a newly elected leader is taken into meeting with some men in grey who quietly explain how the world is really run - election night was like flipping a switch within an hour of winning: praising "Secretary Clinton" and Obama, now even saying he might keep chunks of the Affordable Care Act, while the infamous wall is going to be "well maybe some fence"

[gavpowell]

Besides, maybe we'll get lucky and he'll be impeached like Nixon was.

Nixon was never impeached - he resigned before they finished the hearing. Clinton and Andrew Johnson are the only presidents ever to be impeached and neither had to resign, so don't get your hopes up

[vmax4steve]

He's also starting to make me believe in the idea that a newly elected leader is taken into meeting with some men in grey who quietly explain how the world is really run

Shown a secret recording of the Kennedy assassination from an angle never seen before, from behind the 'grassy knoll'

Sadly he certainly had the right wing 'knack' of making the lower classes feel cosey about their prejudices, and that's what got him elected. Ok he's an arsehole, but it's what he does that matters, not what he is, and if he does implement import tariffs, rebuild US infrastructure and get the jobless figures down then he'll have done what he was elected for.

I was a hippie dreamer in the 70's, but when you're living in an industrial consumer society and dependant on having a job for food, clothing and accomodation then free trade globalisation means your company leaving the UK and setting up in Thailand leaving you to face the massed eastern european migrant workers face to face, and as they willingly work for minimum wage and the basest of conditions, that's what you get as well.

Theresa May is harping on about the UK being a beacon of world free trade on completion of brexit, while Jeremy Corbyn is saying fair trade. I'm with fair, not free: if western companies set up in poor nations then they should practise Fordism and pay their workers enough to buy the goods they produce and stimulate the economy of that country, something that the Ford company itself isn't doing in Mexico, something that Trump says he's against, and on that issue I'm with Trump.

[itsnoteasy]

I'm not a hundred percent sure and I could be wrong but I would have thought making a white supremacist, chief White House spokesman ,isn't exactly a great start.

[gavpowell]

Theresa May is harping on about the UK being a beacon of world free trade on completion of brexit, while Jeremy Corbyn is saying fair trade. I'm with fair, not free

Ironically, I said a while back that if Kennedy were running for office today, he'd never be allowed to get anywhere because the scandals would just be too great. Now I'm not sure - maybe you can get anyone elected!

Surprised to see you agreeing with Corbyn but I agree too - I'm sick of hearing people justify paying people to live in squalor working in sweatshops with words to the effect of "That's a really good wage for them!" Great, let's slash your salary and see how you like cancelling your Sky subscription and foreign holidays.

[vmax4steve]

Ironically, I said a while back that if Kennedy were running for office today, he'd never be allowed to get anywhere because the scandals would just be too great. Now I'm not sure - maybe you can get anyone elected!

Surprised to see you agreeing with Corbyn but I agree too - I'm sick of hearing people justify paying people to live in squalor working in sweatshops with words to the effect of "That's a really good wage for them!" Great, let's slash your salary and see how you like cancelling your Sky subscription and foreign holidays.

Kennedy's brain was in his trousers, the Cuban misslie crisis and Bay Of Pigs fiasco showed that. To secretly put short range nuclear weapons into Turkey and not expect a response from the Soviets put the world at incredible risk.

Let's not have a free trade agreement with India (or anyone) until they sort out their overpopulation and intense poverty, never mind having a space programme, feed and clothe your people first.

Like Corbyn says, Trump got the votes by shifting the blame away from the big corporations, for it was they who left the US for foreign climes and dirt poor wages for higher profit. Can't blame the people in those countries, can't blame eastern europeans for wanting to come here either, but Blair signed up for total free movement in 2004 while most of the EU countries decided not to, so they came here.

We are reaping the winds of thirty years of unregulated Thatcher/Reagan economics, the 1% have it all and have to be forced to invest it rather than let it pile ever higher in tax havens.

[jonny66]

I agree with Steve, unfortunately the majority of Turkeys in this country will continue to buy the Sun and vote for Christmas as they're told.

[itsnoteasy]

Having trade with India is the least of our problems, Saudi Arabia, now there is a dangerous country ,with horrendous human rights and we can't get enough of them, they own half of London, the Russian mafia the other half and the Chinese own our debt, India is way way down the list of terrible counties we deal with.

[vmax4steve]

Having trade with India is the least of our problems, Saudi Arabia, now there is a dangerous country ,with horrendous human rights and we can't get enough of them, they own half of London, the Russian mafia the other half and the Chinese own our debt, India is way way down the list of terrible counties we deal with.

Unfortunately they have most of the oil and like to buy modern weapons designed by western engineers and scientists while preaching a religion that's archaic and daft. Religion is the opium of the people, especially the muslims who can't seem to think on a logical level and seem to need to be ruled by an iron hand to keep them from free form murder.
It's turning around, and our generation is in the middle of it and putting up with the fundamentalist backlash, but it will get there in the end, though sadly we won't see it.

Biggest problem the world faces is human overpopulation,

"Stop rutting, just for a day, let's work out this food/air deal OK" Bill Hicks