I don't recollect China cutting steel production which is what he wanted them to do.Trump took on China and they blinked.
I don't recollect China cutting steel production which is what he wanted them to do.Trump took on China and they blinked.
You don't seem to recollect my earlier question, either.I don't recollect China cutting steel production which is what he wanted them to do.
Then how would you rather govern the affairs of state; some random bloke stand on a rock to distribute law and justice?Neither. The government is the problem not the solution.
The Queen just goes through the motion's really She could do the same with a president. Exactly the same actually.and wish to abolish the monarchy?
So, a set-up similar to the French system?The Queen just goes through the motion's really She could do the same with a president. Exactly the same actually.
Why the hell people say she would have to go defeats me. Pure baloney. Our set up is too old and dated.
Correct, the "tories" have continued all of Blair's policies since he finished, glad you have finally realised this.Tories dont lead they just follow
here we are Tories taking on a Labour policy:
No, but the solution lies not with ANY of our current politicians, of any party.Then how would you rather govern the affairs of state; some random bloke stand on a rock to distribute law and justice?
Poor old sod. Get over him.I want Boris back.
Why pick the French? They are not the only country to use a presidential system.So, a set-up similar to the French system?
Did they? I thought the trade balance wasn't much changed. Apparently it got worse.I agree - Sunak would be great. But he's too vulnerable to Labour cries of being out of touch and untrustworthy.
Trump took on China and they blinked.
He may have reduced china's steel exports a bit. He wanted them to cut back production so that supply and demand would increase prices. That is the view given anyway but I'd say highly unlikely to be accepted.Did they? I thought the trade balance wasn't much changed.
No, but 'twas the first example to mind. A tripartite system, in any case, unless you're aiming for a bipartisan solution. The Romans introduced both with limited success, and our society has become much too complex for a confederacy. Federalism has become entwined with Globalism so where are we headed in the 21st century for government to solve these issues?Why pick the French? They are not the only country to use a presidential system.
The USA has 2 parties. We have more that get to be MP's so can't see the reason for your comment.A tripartite system, in any case,
I disagree: our history makes the UK what it is. It binds us, monarchy and people, in a Commonwealth. It is often forgot and requires constant updates to maintain its relevance in the modern world. Advocate dissolution at your peril.The USA has 2 parties. We have more that get to be MP's so can't see the reason for your comment.
In a presidential system a party needs to be able to provide a president. I suppose that at the MP level things could finish up that the presidential iideas could be blocked however the same could happen in our system due to groups joining. With the greens gaining momentum this sort of thing may happen here There is no perfect solution so my comment is a bit tongue in cheek. I feel our system needs a throrough shaking up. It has too much history behind it and that has an effect on behaviour.
Our system effectively is anyway. Business is the ruling factor on globalism. They are the ones that "do it".Federalism has become entwined with Globalism so where are we headed in the 21st century for government to solve these issues?