What is the Woody Guthrie's "Do Re Mi" of internal EU migration?
There's still an unfilled niche on Twitter or in actual media for Brexit Jones' Diary.
second vote campaigners seem either remarkably coy about whether they want to remain on the terms Cameron negotiated
I don't really understand this part. Is the idea that the Remainers need to come up with some new, better alternative to Brexit? If so, why is that burden on them? At this point, there's a clear choice between the Status Quo (remain) and Brexit (which demonstrably sucks and will continue to suck). Maybe the politics require Remainers to be able to point to some reforms to address the (perceived?) grievances that led many to support Brexit in the first place, but that seems like a question for another day. Today's question is "Stop the Brexit insanity, yes or no?"
But I'm sure I'm oversimplifying.
3: BC Remain in a second vote has to address the issues laid out v well here: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/20/national-emergency-brexit-vote-westminster
There's an open question as to whether or not the ongoing refugee crisis is part of what drives concern over immigration here in the UK, but that is a conversation for another time.
I mean, it's not that open.
This is the Ivan Rogers speech? Yes, not a bad analysis.
Anecdata from various journalistic sources over the last couple of years suggests that some Leave voters didn't at the time distinguish between free movement with in the EU and immigration in general and believed they were voting for more restrictions on immigration from anywhere. The leaders of the Leave campaign were not at pains to dispel this illusion before the referendum.
Free movement remains one of the most popular parts of EU membership, commanding in support of more than two-thirds of people in every other EU country bar the United Kingdom.
Whence the difference?
For all the imperfections of the Single Market, services trade between Member States is, in many sectors, freer than it is between the federal states of the US, or the states in Canada.
This surprises me. Maybe I just don't understand it. What's one of the services that a French person or company can legally exchange with a German that a Californian couldn't exchange with a Texan? I can think of lots of goods like that - weed, for starters - but few or no services.
Maybe that's a reference to the many and growing professions that need licensure from state boards, like hairdressing?
I think the insurance market is highly state-specific. Plus many professional licenses don't work across state lines, like for lawyers. There are hoops to jump through to work on other states.
10, 11: The EU doesn't have to deal with stuff like that? A German doctor/lawyer/barber can move to France one week and hang out their shingle the next week? My mind is blown.
Mostly me being dumb, I should have thought of that, there are professionals in my family. I'm still at least a bit surprised that's less of a problem in the EU, though. Is it a problem for lawyers, doctors, and teachers in the EU, but not for plumbers and hairdressers and all the other random professions that Matt Yglesias thinks shouldn't need credentials?
Lawyers need to be qualified in local law, otherwise yes, pretty much - though doctors moving around is more about free movement of labour. The single market for services is about, well, read ithttps://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/services_en
Lawyers need to be qualified in local law, otherwise yes, pretty much - though doctors moving around is more about free movement of labour. The single market for services is about, well, read ithttps://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/services_en
I don't know "qualified in local law" is as involved as "passing a bar exam". I would assume that French and German laws are more different from each other than Pennsylvania and Ohio laws are from each other.
Also, maybe lawyers are just being dramatic about how hard it is to pass a bar exam. They all moan about it, but none of them I know well enough to know the details have failed to pass on the first try.
On the one hand, people buy hundreds of dollars worth of exam prep stuff to pass. On the other hand, Michael Cohen seemingly passed in what is supposed to be one of the states where it is hardest to pass.
It's probably just multiple choice:
Complete this clause from the Bill of Right: Nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of __________________.
A. jury duty
B. life or limb
C. life
D. none of the above
16: The lawyers here can (and no doubt will) correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, the bar exam is a tough slog. Not because it's conceptually difficult (as compared to, say, the more difficult courses in law school), but because it covers so much detail (some of which is not really covered in law school).
Also: it's possible that the lawyers you know are at the smarter end of the spectrum. I mean, plenty of people do fail the bar on the first try, I'm pretty sure?
I doubt it as some of them are my siblings.
||
If anyone is hankering for some bitcoin schadenfreude Nouriel Roubini's twitter feed is a delight to read. And the abuse he's getting in comments shows he's really getting under their skin.
|>
Yes, with that link I learned about the Professional Qualifications Directive: the EU requires mutual recognition of professional qualifications and sets standards for them. Also there appears to be a new digital system to transfer one's qualification across borders for "general care nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacists, real estate agents and mountain guides". (You know, the big stuff.) And they also seem to advocate for less restrictive qualification regimes, ceteris paribus, on economic grounds.
Of course, I imagine for many of these qualifications, language is a practical barrier harder for the EU to alleviate.
Every mountain speaks the same language.
||
Tension again began to build after the murder of a Montenegrin priest, whose head was subsequently displayed on the Ottoman fortress of Spuj. In response to the Montenegrin government's protest, Ottoman forces were moved to the frontier.|>
(Relevant because Montenegrin is of course the language of all mountains.)
Not the Green Mountains. They speak Monteverde.
re: 8
I think: i) a virulently evil right wing press, ii) a state broadcaster that is basically a fellow traveller with the virulently evil right wing press, iii) Britain really did experience a very high level of influx from other EU countries in the early years after the introduction of freedom of movement,* which the afore-mentioned virulently evil right wing fuckers did their best to capitalise on, and (ironically) Britain chose not to impose the various restrictions on freedom of movement that were imposed by many other EU countries.
I am totally pro freedom of movement (I'm married to a citizen of another EU country, ffs), and I think losing it will be a disaster for this country, but it's certainly true that some parts of the UK experienced unprecedentedly huge levels of migration in a very short period of time. The right approach, from honest and honourable politicians, would have been to be open about this, and defend freedom of movement on both principle, and on economic grounds, and on the grounds that freedom of movement suits the UK the other way, too.*** The UK has a very high number of citizens who live in other UK countries.
Unfortunately, our media and politicians -- on the centre and left, as well as the right -- took the cowardly route. See virulently evil right wing press, above.
* around 80% of all the internal migration from the new member states went to the UK and Ireland. 5% (5!) of the population of Poland migrated.**
** although both Germany and France both have higher numbers of immigrants, generally, and higher absolute numbers of EU migrants, too.
*** to their credit, the Scottish Parliament, and the Scottish National Party, have always done this.
The UK has a very high number of citizens who live in other UK countries.
I mean EU countries, although the original sentence is also true.
7: I agree with Chris that this is not an open question at all. There is absolutely no doubt that stopping south Asian immigration (coded as "Muslim" quite often) is a hugely popular yet publicly inadmissible cause. That is what all the barriers that May erected as Home Secretary were really defending against: they are trying to stop the import of wives and husbands from Pakistan to places like Bradford where there is virtually no intermarriage between majority and minority communities.
But just as "Brussels" became the synecdoche for all the outside world, so EU migration stood in for fears of immigration from outside the EU. There are some towns, agricultural shitholes mostly, where there was a huge influx of EU migrants to do the work the English won't. There are some places (Wisbech comes to mind) where the whole process was run by Latvian mafiosi. These small towns really did suffer.
But when all these people are driven out, two problems will remain. First, the countryside and agribusiness generally, will be slaughtered, as it loses first its subsidies and then its workers*. Second, the hostility to Muslims will increase as the lesson sinks in that brexit has done nothing to curb their immigration. Max Hastings had a piece arguing as much in the Times recently.
Your hard line Thatcherites like Patrick Minford think this is just fine: after a few years the proletariat will learn that it must work or starve and a new, strong Britain will be built by the hard working survivors. This is not a view that wins elections, though.
Since this is *that* thread, can I just vent about the sheer smug stupidity of Saint Jeremy Corbyn in this morning's Guardian? Still claiming that he can get a better deal from Brussels; still claiming that European rules make it impossible for him to use state aid as he wants. Both these propositions are demonstrably untrue.
And since he says he won't give us a second referendum even if he gets a general election (as if) what is the fucking point of voting for him? Supposing there were a parliamentary revolt which brought this government down, we'd still be left with a choice between stupid and smug on one side and wicked and smug on the other. No competence or honesty anywhere in sight.
30. Suppose Keir Starmer rallied the troops tonight and forced a leadership contest, could a competent or honest (I'd settle for one or the other) candidate even win, or has the arcane process of election locked it in for Corbyn until they split?
re: 32
Is there any sign of that sort of rebellion happening? It doesn't seem like it.
Democracy in this country is completely broken. There's a likely majority for Remain, and certainly not even a plurality for either no-deal or May's shitty deal. I guess all the 'Corbyn and Starmer are playing nine-dimensional chess' chickens have come home to roost.
No, there's no sign of it. It was purely a hypothetical. JC's Guardian article of course leaves open the only question of interest. He says that in the event of his winning a snap election (won't happen), he would go back to Brussels and get a better deal. No he won't, they've said so. They're bored to death with all this nonsense. So JC asks for better deal; EU says, "Go forth and multiply." Then what does he do? He STILL won't say.
The bar exam is a high stakes test, and worth some anxiety, but it's pass fail, and designed so a C student can pass it. Places like California and NY, that allow people who didn't graduate from real American law schools to sit for the exam, bring the stats down. The differences between the laws of Ohio and Pennsylvania are way too subtle to be captured by the bar exam, even in the era before the universal standardized exam. Now, it's only a small step above mindless protectionism.
Three of my four admissions stem from a single exam taken in 1991. I could probably get a dozen more from that, maybe more, if I wanted to pay admission fees and annual dues. The fourth, Maryland, was based on an abbreviated open book test (which I could take after some years of practice). At least that one was about Maryland law. Most of my career has been about federal law anyway: I've been saying for 25 years that it's beyond obvious that a unified federal bar is probably required under the Commerce Clause, but no one wants to gore all the oxen on that. (Anyone here know any Delaware lawyers? They'd fight that to the death.)
In most states, you have to be a member of the state bar to be admitted to the federal bar. So, I would have a case that's identical to one I've handled in 11 states, controlled by federal law, and I have to hire a local lawyer to sign the pleadings. On the other hand, a significant part of my income now derives from exactly that -- and here, the local lawyer must, by rule, be included in all sorts of things that other federal bars don't require. Now I try to make myself a real value add, and it does generally work that way.
Example: a few years back, I was 'local counsel' for a Maryland lawyer friend representing an Alaska company in a suit in Idaho federal court against a California company, and, I think, a multinational headquartered in Ohio. My Maryland colleague and the California lawyer got into a discovery spat, exchanging letters, and ultimately someone filed a motion. The judge was annoyed, as they usually are about discovery spats (I'm sure, by the way, that we were in the right!) but noticed that the Californians' Idaho lawyer and I hadn't been directly involved, so he used that as an excuse to deny the motion and order than nothing further could be filed about this or any future spat until the Idaho lawyers had genuinely conferred.
It's annoying for the clients, who only really have a relationship with their own lawyers and not someone playing my role; they only find out about the added expense of the local lawyer pretty far down the process of deciding on the strategy. On the other hand, the Idaho judge knows he'll be seeing me again and again over our careers, and will never see the Californian or Marylander again. So of course he wants someone who has a professional reputation at stake standing in front of him.
The differences between the laws of Ohio and Pennsylvania are way too subtle to be captured by the bar exam...
Not being able to buy beer in a grocery store isn't really subtle in my book.
Plus, Ohio is one of those enlightened topless states.
37 That's not on the bar. Back when I was looking at it, Pa was widely considered the easiest bar exam to take to waive into DC. Anyone would do, so the advice at the big outfits was to take something nearby that might be useful, and get 2 for 1. Or take the easiest.
Thanks. Now I'll be able to just "Sure, but PA is the easiest bar exam." That will come in useful alarmingly often.
Don't know about PA, but everyone in law school jokes about "PASSachusetts."
One fun part about the VA bar is, you have to dress up in court attire for both days of the test.
I just ate a whole bowl of mussels and now I can barely move. On topic, because the restaurant was named after a city in Belgium, which is where the EU is headquartered
I also learned that the Amish make good cheese.
44: They didn't try to give you a vegemite sandwich, did they?
"The judge was annoyed, as they usually are about discovery spats "
"Mr Carp, stop wasting the court's time, take off those ridiculous objects and put on your cross-examination cravat."
Speaking of European cultural exchange, anyone have a good Glühwein recipe? I've found ones online from as simple as orange+wine+cinnamon to recipes with 12 different spices and rum/brandy added.
They aren't spats. They're gaiters.
anyone have a good Glühwein recipe?
Weird! Before yesterday, I'd never heard of Glühwein, and then my mom showed up with two bottles of the stuff. (It's a pre-mixed version, like this. And one of them is made from blueberries, which seems...questionable.)
I had it at a Munich Christmas market a couple years ago, I suspect it's one of those things where the atmosphere is a much greater influence on the taste than the actual ingredients.
Where "atmosphere" means "Standing in the fucking cold, wondering about your life choices" or maybe that's just me.
Christmas in Munich is the functional equivalent of a late-season kiddie soccer game?
Democracy in this country is completely broken. There's a likely majority for Remain
This is the part I keep getting stuck on. I understand that anti-democratic things happen under the U.S. Constitution (e.g., getting elected president by losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College). But it's really bizarre to watch another country going off a cliff on purpose against the (likely) will of its people.
The last time I had Gluhwein was literally at a late-season kiddie soccer game. That's why European culture is superior.
The part I get stuck on is that, even given an opportunity for a do-over, it is not inconceivabe that the UK would still support Brexit.
The amazing thing to me is that to do anything in the US you need to win like three consecutive elections by a supermajority and have had your party in power for enough previous years that you have enough of the judiciary aligned with you and then it still takes eight years to go into effect. The UK had one vote where something won by like 4% and the outcome is considered carved on tablets from Mt Sinai.
58. Neither of those conditions strikes me as being ideal.
|| OT, but seasonal:
The weekly eggnog ration has been increased from twenty to thirty grammes.
|>
the outcome is considered carved on tablets from Mt Sinai.
Let's try to avoid triggering an outburst from Jeremy Corbyn.
60 is genius, mind if I tweet the link?
That is great. I'd forgotten about it. I must have seen it before.
I feel I would appreciate it more if I had read A Christmas Carol. (As opposed to half-remembering the Simpsons parody.)
I don't think anybody has read it in 50 years (except maybe ajay). But I recall seeing the movie with George C. Scott as Scrooge.
In our experience, any recipe for gluhwein is greatly enhanced by adding a good slug of slivovitz. (Mine, roughly: a bottle of cheap red wine, a mug of orange juice, a tablespoon or two of sugar according to taste, an orange and a lemon sliced and stuck with cloves, a cinnamon stick, a grating of nutmeg, and the aforementioned slivovitz. Bring to a simmer, then turn off the heat and leave to infuse for several hours before rewarming to drink.)
Thanks for reminding me of 60.
We read CC aloud regularly for years. First half, anyway. I was pretty good at Marley, not that it was much of a stretch.
It's really hard for a white guy to do a Jamaican accent without sounding racist.
I don't mean to disparage the cultural traditions of the United Kingdom, but 68 sounds much worse than just drinking cheap red wine at room temperature.
That's why you only do it on radio plays.
I guess drinking cheap red wine at room temperature is one of my hobbies, practiced on every occasion I am the one buying the wine.
Anyway, if you buy wine made from Concord grapes, you don't need to add the sugar.
Just look for wines from New York state.
I repost 60 every year, where have you people been? I also annoy my family with it.
71: I'm not particularly attached to the cultural traditions of the United Kingdom; for one thing they don't include slivovitz, and for another the traditional English way of making mulled wine is to take a red-hot poker from the fire and plunge it directly into the wine glass.
If you stop plunging red-hot pokers into wine glasses, what's next? Boarding schools where the porter doesn't run over enemies with a grass roller after beating them to death or unconsciousness with a giant spoon?
ISTR he was squealing while being run over.
I wasI saw him beaten in his home (they didn't show the spoon) and then dragged down the steps as dead weight leaving a big trail of blood. Then, after some other stuff happened, he was found the next day under the roller. I didn't see any scenes with him in between, but I was reading something else at the same time.
Clearly third-party adjudication is needed. Wake up your kid.
I just watched it again. They just find him already dead under the roller.
Ok fine. Does someone else squeal while being murdered?
Based on how much money these people have 150 after the end of the Raj, it's clear the British Empire stole at least $30 trillion from the colonies. Can't break it down by specific colonies.
Honestly, this whole series is a master class in novel ways to be cruel to a spouse or child.
No wonder you find it more engaging than Mossy does.
Seeing how Moby is so obviously a calculating sociopath.
Him and Thorn, the commenters I'm most afraid of meeting IRL.
Come for the casual cruelty, stay for the accidental incest/Celtic rituals.
Yes. She may have married her half brother but at least he was murdered before they could have any kids.
FFS. The script clearly reads:
MOBY: No, it's midwinter.
OPINIONATED SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE: RACIST
Anyway, it sounded like you were watching an Arthurian adaption. Which I guess would be Welsh, but otherwise inconsistent with your stated tastes.
I see how it could seem like that. The people were even killed using pre-gunpowder technology.
I read A Christmas Carol to my daughter just a couple of years ago. It is a) good, but b) suffers from the fact that Dickens was paid by the word.
A modern Christmas story would reflect modern beliefs: that Christmas must have deep snow and pine trees; that it must revolve around meals at which one eats as much food as one can, as part of a large communal meal; that happiness is solely the result of acquiring material possessions.
This Christmas, read "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich".
This Christmas, read "To Build a Fire".
Merry Christmas, internet reprobates, lurkers, & Anglo-Saxons.
Same to you, Mobes. Have I told the blog yet about the baby? We have a brand new baby girl! She's two weeks old and cuter than all the other babies. (Sorry, other-baby-havers, but it's just objectively true.)
You did not mention that yet. Congratulations.
Thanks. This morning's Christmas miracle was me learning what everyone means when they say "blow-out diaper." Those things really need a better gasket around the leg.
Congrats, Stanley! Merry Christmas where appropriate.
Congratulations, Stanley and Mrs Stanley (Dorothy?)!
You fatten up the baby to get a good seal at the leg of the diaper. Then, they shit so much it explodes out the top.
Congratulations Stanley & Stanley's partner in baby making! If the baby wasn't all decked out in a carefully chosen outfit & entire family two steps from the door, heading (late) to an important occassion when the blow out occurred then further congratulations bc the best is yet to come!
Congrat Stanley! I was going to give more blowout advice but was pwned by 108. Once it's going up the back it's basically like a thermometer to judge how bad it was- we reached neck-high a couple times.
Congratulations Stanley. Eventually you can train them to change their own diapers.
Stanley, here is the secret to ending blow-outs: ignore the weight sizing on diapers. I'm convinced it's to make the baby's butt look sleeker. The moment you have a blowout, go up a size. Or two, if it still happens in the next size. For real.
A baby can shit so much volume that nothing large enough to contain it will stay on their waist. Just accept that occasionally you'll have a huge splash of shit to deal with.
113: thanks, heebers. We actually already have some of the next-size-up diapers, because I'm bad at shopping for babies.
I didn't even know this was a thing.
I'm sure reproduction would be less popular if such possibilities were highlighted in the EULA.
It's not just the volume. It's the consistency. Think two days drinking cheap beer and eating only Taco Bell.
You're allowed to give them beer?
I always think Taco Bell is a phone company. So confusing.
Ooh I actually have something useful to contribute. One way to minimize up-the-back blowouts is to use a slightly larger diaper as others said, but then fold over the waist to the inside so it makes a little containment pouch.
Just not having nice things or squeamishness is good too.
Yeah, preemptive fuck-disposal is the way to go with babies. They are not long for this world anyway.
The fucks I mean, not the babies.
Preemptive fuck disposal is the way to prevent additional babies.
It's not very effective birth control.