There are no 'F's in Brexit Dividend

One of the most galling aspects of Brexit is the realisation of how much politicians lie. This week, there has been a coordinated PR effort amongst Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Theresa May to talk about the "Brexit Dividend" being used on the NHS.

Yet the government's own economic analysis shows that there is no Brexit dividend. Every scenario makes us poorer. There's no f'in Brexit Dividend.

Do the politicians really believe their own nonsense, or are they lying? Either option is frankly horrifying. This whole thing really typifies what has gone wrong. Ideology trumps evidence and experts. What is most frightening is that the rot goes all the way up to the Prime Minister herself. It makes absolutely no sense to try to rally the country around a lie, as the lie will eventually be exposed, and the sooner the better.

Comments

Breaking the Article 50 Impasse

Andrew Tyrie overestimates the UK's control over when the UK government can invoke Article 50. As with much of the Brexit debate, hope and aspiration trump cold hard reality. The next few months will see a lot of work by the UK government setting up new departments and policy positions relating to the triggering of Article 50 and Britain's exit from the EU. This is a sensible and necessary delay. However this article by The Independent makes the case that the UK should delay invoking Article 50 until we establish an informal agreement with the EU on our exit terms. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-andrew-tyrie-must-manage-unrealistic-expectations-warns-tory-mp-a7220681.html This is very desirable from the UK's perspective, but flatly contradicts statements by the EU (including direct statements by Jean-Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk and Cecilia Malmström, as well as official EU policy) that no talks can happen prior to invoking Article 50...

Can information theory prove the existence of God?

I recently came across this website by Perry Marshall, which makes a really interesting proof of the existence of God. The argument is basically that DNA constitutes information (a code), yet all information that we know of is the product of a mind. Randomness cannot create information. Therefore, God exists. Lovely argument. Now let's pick some holes. 1) My first observation is that this argument is almost exactly the same as entropy. The argument is that DNA is a low entropy state. Yet randomness always increases entropy. Therefore DNA cannot be the product of random processes, therefore it must be the work of God (or Maxwell's Demon). However this argument is invalid because localised decreases in entropy are perfectly possible, and expected, even though the entropy of the system as a whole increases. Considering that the site claims to make use of information theory, it presumably is aware of information entropy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy It fo...

Identity is taking over politics

Mark Lilla writes in the New Statesman ( September 2017 ) that the "Left", i.e. the US Democratic Party, social justice and anti-facism movements, lost the US election due to being side-tracked by gender and race issues. Enough of the electorate weren't buying it and Trump won. In hindsight attacking a large proportion of the electorate based on their gender and race is never a good idea, no matter which race or gender you are talking about. No, it's not acceptable to denigrate men or white people either. Trump of course did the same, by attacking foreigners, Mexicans, Muslims and women, but he got away with it due to media bias and partisan politics. At home, Peter North, a prominent pro-Brexit blogger, tweeted about "self determination". This immediately raised the issue of what is "self", and lo and behold we are back to identity again. If we all feel European, then being governed by the EU is indeed self-determination, and let's not ki...

Opinion

Search This Blog