All the little Brexiters are fawning over this story. Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) is apparently investing in the UK “despite Brexit”. The part they conveniently play down is this:
There is also the benefit of a cheaper pound when producing products bound for foreign markets.
There’s the rub, you see. GSK already has several manufacturing sites in the UK, so it’s not as if it has chosen to come to the UK ahead of anywhere else. I used to work in this industry and I know how much it would cost to shift pharmaceutical production to another site, especially if it was one in another country – the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) would make it nigh on impossible, and it would raise regulatory issues for long-standing products that had hitherto been “overlooked”.
A decision like this, reportedly worth £275 million, is not something you scrape together in a few weeks – it’ll have been years in the planning. The only outwardly visible signs for the UK economy will be a few dozen extra jobs for high-flying graduates, and if GSK are even remotely similar to the outfit I used to work for, they’ll try and keep that to a minimum anyway in order to maximise the benefit to themselves. A large part of that £275 million will pay for the internal arseing about that will be required. Basically, GSK is investing in itself.
The majority of GSK’s UK-manufactured goods are exported, and the collapse of the GBP following Brexit means selling GBP products on a USD market is highly beneficial to whoever is doing it. As long as the UK doesn’t physically fall into the sea, and as long as the GBP remains weak, GSK will coin it.
Don’t get me wrong, GSK are not doing anything that any other company wouldn’t (hell, they even offered me a job once). But they’re not doing it to save the UK. It’s for the short- to medium term benefit of their shareholders.
This latest update comes following a reader question via the Contact Form. The original article was published in 2008.
The topic keeps coming back because it is relevant to all learner drivers. When I wrote the original story, DVSA – or DSA, as it was then – had just updated its Internal Guidance Document (DT1) to say:
To ensure uniformity, when conducting car or vocational tests and ADI qualifying examinations, only assess the candidate’s ability to control the vehicle and do not consider it as a fault if, for example, they do not hold the steering wheel at ten to two or quarter to three or if they cross their hands when turning the steering wheel. The assessment should be based on whether the steering is smooth, safe and under control.
The part I’ve highlighted was an addition, and in previous versions of DT1 the steering technique was not mentioned. Even so, no examiners round my way ever failed people for “crossing their hands”. You see, all DVSA was doing with this update was making sure that its examiners were clear on the subject (hence the phrase “[ensuring] uniformity”). Reading between the lines, it seems that there had been complaints about one or two examiners around the country who had been faulting candidates unnecessarily. Reading even deeper, I would surmise that these were ex-ADIs who had carried their ideas about “crossing hands” and “holding the steering wheel properly” across with them when they gave up teaching.
The bottom line is that as long as steering is under control it doesn’t matter how a pupil does it. They can steer with one hand, with their palm, use hand over hand… it simply doesn’t matter. And it hasn’t mattered – not officially, anyway – for a very long time. I emphasise again that the change to DT1 was a clarification and not a major change in policy.
A lot of ADIs and PDIs get hung up on this whole business of “crossing your hands”. Two versions ago, Driving: The Essential Skills (TES) said:
Turning – When turning the steering wheel, avoid crossing your hands. Except at low speeds, this can reduce your control and can cause an accident. Feed the rim of the steering wheel through your hands. Vary your hand movements according to the amount of lock you want.
This is called the pull-push technique.
TES was not saying that you shouldn’t cross your hands. It just quite correctly pointed out that the rapid steering action that a hand-over-hand method can lead to might give rise to a loss of control at higher speeds. But there is a huge difference in the effect produced by whipping the steering round quickly as you’re turning into a road at 20-30mph compared with the same action at 5-10mph.
The only type of “crossing hands” that ends up being wrong in almost all circumstances is the one where pupils grip the steering wheel tightly and turn from their shoulders, keeping their hands in a fixed place on the steering wheel. This nearly always results in insufficient lock to get round the corner, resulting in wide turns, or possibly over-steering if the pupil suddenly panics and shifts their grip to get the car round. Just about every learner does it like this on their first lesson.
The last two versions of TES (most recently, 2015) have merely said:
- place your hands on the steering wheel in a position that’s comfortable and which gives you full control
- keep your movements steady and smooth
- turn the steering wheel to turn a corner at the correct time
Personally, I rue the loss of the extra detail in the version before this. I see it as a dumbing down exercise, and far too many people are ready to believe that it’s some sort of admission that the “pull-push” method was bad, when it most definitely wasn’t. The pull-push technique – where steering is achieved by alternately pulling the wheel down with one hand, then changing grip and pushing it with the other – certainly isn’t the only way to steer, and people who can already drive shouldn’t be forced to use it. But for most beginners, who have not yet developed a suitable technique, it should definitely be a starting point for them. It requires hand coordination which, in turn, becomes a foundation for good car control.
A good analogy would be with a professional footballer. He can play “keepy up” for hours on end because it is an important basic control skill – but you will rarely see him do it on the field. However, the coordination required to do it enables him to do other things during matches that he would otherwise struggle with.
It’s the same with steering. Being able to use pull-push properly is an important foundation skill that drivers should possess, even if they end up rarely using it in favour of a more chav-like style. Once beginners can do pull-push, they can steer easily without going wide on bends and corners. They are less likely to over-steer into kerbs, and are more confident as a result, being able to adjust their steering in a controlled manner. A major drawback to hand-over-hand steering for beginners who know no other way is that they can easily panic and over steer.
The new wording in TES could actually be taken as a mandate for teaching poor steering methods by some instructors, because it’s easier for them and easier for their pupils. Some people are already under the mistaken impression that it’s “coaching” to let people develop bad habits in preference to teaching them properly.
Incidentally, when someone pull-pushes the steering in one direction, the natural return action frequently involves push-pull. They’re not two separate methods like some people seem to believe. It doesn’t matter whether you pull first, or push.
Why shouldn’t I turn (dry steer) the wheel when the car isn’t moving?
Moving the wheel when the car is stationary is called “dry steering”. There’s no rule or law which says you mustn’t do it, and examiners do not mark you on it. However, it is bad practice for several reasons:
- it can damage your tyres
- it can damage your steering mechanism
- it can damage the road surface
Scrunching your tyres over gravel instead of rolling over the road surface leads to more wear. Doing it on glass or nails can easily give you a puncture. The extra strain involved when dry steering leads to more wear in the steering mechanism of your car. And scrunching your tyres on tarmac in hot weather can chew up the surface, which holds water in winter, and which can cause cracks if the water freezes – leading finally to potholes. You’ll get some smart arses telling you they’ve never come across an example where dry steering has caused actual damage, but the reality is that every time someone has to replace a tyre, dry steering will have contributed to it’s overall wear and tear.
Replacing a tyre is going to cost you a few tens of pounds at the very least. Fixing worn out steering will cost hundreds of pounds. Potholes can cause hundred of pounds worth of damage to your car – plus you pay taxes for them to be (eventually) filled in, so it makes sense not to contribute to their formation.
Except where pupils have a genuine problem and need to dry steer, as the default steering method it is an excuse for laziness and bad driving practices. Dry steering should be discouraged for most drivers, most of the time.
I find that many pupils can’t control the car and steer at the same time, and they need to dry-steer
That’s fair enough, but make sure you’re not just looking for an easy way out. In all the years I have been teaching, the number of pupils who couldn’t be taught to control the car at low speed and steer pull-push at the same time, and so have had to resort to dry steering, have been few. The vast majority of learners have initial problems with just about every aspect of driving, but that doesn’t mean they should be taught a dumbed down approach at the first opportunity. In my own experience, based on the observed skills of pupils I’ve picked up from other instructors, that is exactly what seems to be happening. Dry steering is seen as an easy way out.
Some people can’t do manoeuvres without dry steering
Yes, I agree, but the number for whom it is a genuine problem is small. The real problem for most is to do with multi-tasking.
Multi-tasking doesn’t mean doing two things at the same time. The human brain can’t handle that. What it does mean is carrying out several tasks concurrently. I know that sounds confusing, but let me explain.
Think of a plate-spinning act – the thing where some guy spins plates on the ends of sticks and keeps them all going without any falling off. He starts with one plate, sets it spinning, then uses the time before it starts to wind down to set another going. Now, he goes back to the first and gives it a boost, then he sets a third plate going. He can now go back and boost the second, and maybe the first again. Then he spins up a fourth plate. And so on, until he has many plates all spinning. All he has to do is give each plate a boost as necessary. This is proper multi-tasking – the plate spinner does one thing at a time, following a sequence.
Let’s apply all this to the turn in the road (TIR). In the worst case, a pupil will start moving without having a clue what they’re going to do next – and the car just moves off along the kerb as their brain tries to figure out what’s going on, and what they should do next. Not quite as bad, but still very messy, is the case where the pupil tries to get the car moving, control the speed, and steer all at once. What usually happens is that the car lurches (perhaps stalls), which distracts them from steering. Then, if they try to steer, their foot comes up off the clutch and the car accelerates, which distracts them again and the steering stops. By this time, they’re almost at the opposite kerbside with very little steering applied.
TIR (assuming we’re doing it as a three-point turn) can be broken into three identical stages, each looking a bit like this:
- select gear
- find the bite
- look around
- release handbrake
- control speed
- get full lock on
- control speed again
- look around
- control speed
- watch the kerb
- control the speed
If we apply the plate spinner approach, where controlling the speed is the same as giving a plate a boost, we have a nice structure that can be followed in a steady sequence. As long as the car’s speed is kept low, everything else just happens.
My instructor is teaching me to dry steer
As I said earlier, you won’t fail for doing it on your test. However, it is bad practice to do it when you don’t need to. It can damage your tyres and other things. If you’re being taught to dry steer right from the start without any attempt to do it properly, then I’m sorry, but your instructor is wrong.
I can’t master “pull-push” steering
If you can steer safely and in control, it doesn’t matter how you do it. Even using the palm of one hand and driving like the chavs do is perfectly acceptable… as long as you’re in control. However, if you are a beginner and you don’t already have a suitable way of steering, pull-push is a good technique to master. You can easily practice it at home using a book or dinner plate as a dummy steering wheel.
If you want to steer left, move your left hand to the top of the wheel (or dinner plate), grip, and pull the wheel down until your hand is at the bottom. Move your right hand to the bottom, grip, let go with your left hand, then push the wheel/plate up. To continue steering, move your left hand to the top again, change grip, and repeat – although you’ll probably have full-lock on before you complete the third movement.
To steer right, start by moving your right hand to the top of the wheel and pull down, etc.
Using pull-push means you always have more steering available to you. Using big turns is good for getting full-lock quickly, but you can use small shuffles for more precise steering as needed.
Get the dinner plate out and make sure you can do it.
Do you have to use “push-pull”?
It’s actually called pull-push, but whatever you call it the answer is “no”. As far as I am aware, you have never HAD to do it that way – you’re probably confused about being told that by your own instructor, or by someone else whose instructor told them. The examiner doesn’t care how you steer as long as you’re in control.
That’s not to say that you can literally steer anyway you like, though. Pull-push (or something very similar to it) done properly is definitely the best way – especially for learners.
How do you teach a pupil to steer properly?
It isn’t rocket science, so don’t let your pupils think it is. Remember that as long as they are in control it doesn’t matter how they steer. Having said that, if they have not driven properly before it is a good idea to teach them how to use the pull-push method first (and to avoid dry-steering), and then let them develop their own style from there. Pull-push requires fundamental skills that they can use in their own style. Let them practice with a large book or diary – if you have a dummy steering wheel, so much the better.
Once they know the principle of steering, the next step is putting it into practice. For most new drivers that’s not a problem and just getting out on the road is enough for them to hone their skills. However, some new drivers need a bit of extra help with knowing how much to steer and when, and finding an empty car park which is big enough to drive around in a figure of eight pattern is great for practising this.
How do I correct someone’s steering while they’re driving?
This is an actual search term used to find the blog. It might be necessary for an instructor to position the car correctly for a learner simply by holding the steering wheel and steering slightly from the passenger seat. The pupil can then zero in on their position relative to the kerb or white lines and learn from that.
How many turns is full lock?
It varies from car to car. In my Ford Focus it is currently just over 1¼ turns either way, but in the previous model it was just under 1½ turns. One of my pupils has a car where it is nearly 2 whole turns.
Is full lock the same as one complete turn?
Read the previous answer. Full lock is when the steering wheel won’t turn any further. It will go “clunk” against the end stop.
One turn is one turn. If full lock is more than one turn, then no, full lock and one turn are not the same.
How much do I need to steer?
Don’t get bogged down counting quarters or halves of turns of the wheel (except perhaps during some manoeuvres). Steer as much as you need to by watching where you’re going and making the car go there.
If you get muddled when it comes to straightening the wheels after having turned to full lock, it can sometimes be useful to count your hand movements needed to get full lock in the first place, then count the same number of hand movements back. Obviously this depends on having a reliable technique – it won’t work if you use hand-over-hand one way, and tiny little shuffles going the other.
What are typical steering mistakes made by learners?
In my experience, the following are all high on the list:
- looking at the steering wheel
- looking too close to the front of the car
- looking at the kerb
- not looking ahead
- being distracted by other things
- gripping the wheel too tightly
- not moving their hands when steering
- steering too much or too quickly
- steering too little or too slowly
The list is really endless, but not all learners make all these mistakes. Most pupils who have problems tend to specialise in one particular fault.
Remember that it is important to identify the precise cause of the fault. Someone might not steer enough going round a corner, but it could be simply that they were trying to change gear or cancel the indicator. In some cases, though, question them and you may well find it was because they were thinking about a mistake they made earlier. The trick is to dig the real fault out.
My pupil keeps moving the steering wheel all the time, even on straight roads
It’s probably because they’re not looking far enough ahead. Think about it: your hands will follow your eyes without you being aware of it, and this means that if you watched a video of yourself driving on a straight road, your hands would be making small corrections the whole time. Learners tend to look much closer to the front of the car, and as a result their adjustments are more frequent, and of greater magnitude. Get them to look a couple of hundred metres further on – point out various things for them to look at – and there’s a good chance their steering will become very smooth.
My pupil keeps taking one hand off the steering wheel
If they’re in control it doesn’t matter. They should try to keep two hands on the wheel, but dropping to one hand now and then isn’t a problem. It can even be a good exercise to get them to steer with one hand – their road position often improves dramatically, because they are concentrating more.
I love this story. Some bloke down in Luton found a cash & carry selling 20kg sacks of Basmati rice for £15.49. That’s a good price, so he bought 40 sacks. Trouble was, he was driving a normal car, and he somehow managed to cram all 40 sacks – totalling 800kg – into it.
Even if we assume that the average person weighs 100kg, that’s the equivalent of eight passengers plus the driver in the car.
He was spotted by police from the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire road policing unit and told to split the load because it was dangerous. However, he obviously knew better, and chose to ignore the advice. His luck ran out when he was stopped again, and this time he was taken to a weighbridge.
He was fined £300, which meant that each sack of rice had ended up costing him £22.99 – which is roughly the normal price. Of course, he now also has a police record. The article doesn’t mention points on his licence.
This story would have been MUCH better if he’d got a bigger fine.
This article was published in December 2013. The UK media has just got hold of the subject as if it has never been discussed before.
I’m in favour of gadgets – I always have been. But only ones that make any sense.
Getting a mobile phone made sense when they first reached a sensible size back in the early 90s. And getting a digital camera made sense when they first reached a sensible price point (also 90s). Getting a computer made sense – firstly, one of the original home computers (late 70s/ early 80s), then a PC (late 80s) once it started to assert itself. Even getting an electronic doorbell kit made sense in 1977 – OK, I’m stretching that one a bit (the original non-electronic ones had a solenoid in them with a central core which acted as a hammer. When you pressed the door button the core would be displaced to strike a metal plate to give a “ding”, and a spring would send it back to hit another plate to give the “dong” when you released the button).
There’s a lot of technology that doesn’t make sense, though, and which only appeals to children and Doctor Who fans. It includes things like Google Glass, Google Self-driving cars, and smart watches. I’ll stick my neck out and say that these will never catch on – no matter how much Google spams the media with stories about how they will.
But now we have another one – I think Amazon is trying to snatch some of the limelight back from Google when it comes to stretching the limits of reason. This article – somewhat unsurprisingly on a games website, though it is covered in other news sources – reports that Amazon is planning to use drone octocopters to deliver packages to customers.
Now, while I am sure that the Doctor Who fans out there will think it’s a brilliant idea – and it is, if you come from the planet Vulcan or are captain of the Battlestar Galactica – there are numerous real world issues to deal with down here on Earth. You can start by watching the promo video below:
Amazon reckons the drone can deliver packages weighing up to around 2¼ kg. I love the way that they clarify this for those whose DNA only contains a single helix:
[it] won’t work for larger and bulkier products, of course, like kayaks and tablesaws.
And TVs. And computers. And a lot of other things that people are likely to want.
Let’s go a little deeper into the reality of the matter. You can already get hobby quadcopters like the Parrot AR Drone. If you look seriously into buying one (all right, I admit it. I have been thinking of getting one purely for the fun value) one of the first things you would investigate after seeing and recovering from the price is flight time and range – how long do you get in the air from a single battery charge, and how far away can it fly before you lose control? Very quickly, your plans to enter the world of James Bond falter when you discover that flight time is up to 15 minutes – or half an hour if you buy the super-duper power pack – combined with a virtual tether of about 50 metres in open space. If you’re anything like me, you then start imagining what’s going to happen if the power runs out or control is lost while your drone is still airborne – and you then check out the wide availability of spare parts plus YouTube videos of how to replace the propellers, the main cross member, the main circuit board, and so on (i.e. it crashes and gets broken a lot). Of course, this assumes that you can retrieve it from the tree it’s lodged in, the roof it’s on, or the middle of the road it’s smashed into before someone runs over it. Or that you can even find it (you’ll undoubtedly have fitted it with a location beacon).
Now, I can’t see how Amazon has managed to get much beyond these technical limitations when you look at the size of its octocopter. It might be a bit bigger, but that means it needs more power because it is heavier (and it has eight motors to power plus a bigger payload). And when you consider that Amazon’s nearest fulfilment centre to me is in Doncaster, any droid would have to fly about 45 miles. Even at an average speed of 10mph that means it would have to be airborne for around 9 hours (assuming it had to get back to base after it dropped the package). The solution to the distance – autonomous navigation via GPS – just means a greater initial weight, and is firmly in Google’s driverless car territory.
That brings us to the small matter of trees, overhead telephone and power cables, lamp posts, wind, rain, snow. I don’t think GPS allows for all those – people in the USA might be able to land a helicopter in their back yard, but many UK streets have a blanket of wires radiating out from telephone poles, and going to individual houses. Many UK gardens have no clear landing zone due to small size, overhanging trees, washing lines, rusting cars and other crap, and so on.
Initially, the service is targeted at American audiences, and although I don’t want to stereotype anyone or anything, in a place where gun ownership is almost mandatory, small commercial drones automatically fall into the same group as rats and pigeons. Some nutter with a gun and a paranoid delusion about Amazon and it’s “spy planes” is bound to take one down sooner rather than later.
So although it is a good idea on paper, I think the technology and the practicalities will stop it happening for the foreseeable future. A bit like computers that can think – they’ve been on about that since the 60s, with every successive generation claiming it will be “soon”. Yet we’re no nearer having one.
Note that such deliveries in the UK are going to have to involve a very select group of people and properties.
I woke up this morning to the news that a road in Bingham is closed because there was a hit-and-run last night on a cyclist – and the cyclist died.
The motorist, a 28-year old male, is now in custody. If he is the one who was driving, he deserves to have the book thrown at him – and there is little doubt that he will have it thrown at him.
Just a couple of additional details. The incident occurred at 10.15pm (i.e. in the dark, since sunset was slightly after 9pm). From the photograph, the section of road where it happened is shrouded with trees (it is mid-summer, so the trees are in full leaf),
and appears to be unlit. The cyclist was a 13-year old child (the bulletins have been updated to say he was 14).
When I was 13 (or 14), I most likely wouldn’t have been allowed out that late, and I know I would have been forced to have lights on my bike. If I had been out that late – especially without lights – the odds of being stopped by a passing police patrol (on foot or in a car) and given a talking to were miles better than 50:50. At 13 (or 14), I would have been classed as a child – not a “boy” or a “young male” in an attempt at political correctness. Even the term “teenager” was mainly reserved for 16-year olds and above. And back then, there wasn’t a culture of “cyclists rule”, which was likely to affect children and other people with attitude or maturity problems. Mind you, neither was there a culture of riding cars around as if they were bikes, either.
I’m just saying.
TV reports suggest the car involved may have been travelling “in convoy” with a 2nd car the police are eager to trace.
Make no mistake about it – the main reason many Brexiters voted to leave was down to their deep hatred of foreigners. The referendum result released the flood gates, and Brexiters immediately began showing their true colours.
The Crown Prosecution Service is currently processing “a record number of hate crimes”.
Amber Rudd, the new Home Secretary, laughably says:
…[hatred has] no place whatsoever in a 21st Century Great Britain.
Actually, Amber, your party’s idiotic decision to hold a referendum on EU membership has created a f___ing huge place for it. The vote to leave the EU has pushed us back into the mid-20th Century economically and socially, so don’t try and act all surprised at the venom people are belching up. In fact, in places where the “Leave” vote was high, and where this kind of thing was always on the back burner, they’ve moved back to the Stone Age. She adds:
We are Great Britain because we are united by values such as democracy, free speech, mutual respect and opportunity for all.
No we’re not. We’re “Great Britain” – especially in the minds of most Brexiters – because of all the foreigners we conquered during the time of The Empire. The reality is that we are a small island which has just cut its ties with mainland Europe at least a hundred years after most of Europe became strong enough to give us a punch in the mouth if we got uppity with them again.
The only way of reversing this tide of hatred (and that of financial collapse) is to stop Brexit before it happens. There should never have been a referendum, and anyone with an IQ greater than that of snot knows it.
This BBC story suggests that NatWest will shortly have to start charging businesses interest to hold their money due to low interest rates.
That’s the opposite way round to how it normally works. And why is this possibly going to happen?
Mark Carney has said it is likely “some monetary policy easing” will be required to boost the UK economy in response to the Brexit vote.
If the interest rate goes to or below zero – which some experts believe will happen later this year – then interest payments switch over, and the banks charge people to hold their money instead of paying for it.
Don’t worry, though. Everything will be all right. The Brexiters say so.
UK tech companies are fairly unanimous in agreeing that the vote to leave the EU has been bad for them. This article in The Register identifies several who have changed their investment plans, thanks to all the little Brexiteers who pretended they knew what they were doing when they signed their name in the “Leave” box last month.
Memset [hosting company], which was planning UK expansion, is now considering the US and continental Europe.
Comtek [telecoms equipment manufacturer]… canned the move of a research team of 25 people from Northern Ireland to north-east Wales and may instead shift them to the Republic of Ireland.
Fantastic Services [app-based domestic services] has moved investment from the UK to Australia and increased its focus on online booking – the latter through its tech team in EU member Bulgaria.
Many others are watching what happens carefully. But not to worry, because everything is going to be ALL RIGHT.
The BBC reported last week that Brexit has caused a massive drop in the UK economy. It’s the lowest it has been since early 2009 (the “Great Recession”).
The only other times we have seen this index fall to these low levels, was the global financial crisis in 2008/9, the bursting of the dot com bubble, and the 1998 Asian financial crisis.”
The difference this time is that it is entirely home-grown, which suggest the impact could be greater on the UK economy than before.
Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, said the figures provided the “first major evidence that the UK is entering a sharp downturn”.
But remember: everything is going to be ALL RIGHT. No, it will. That guy from the soup kitchen in Blackpool said so.
This article says that Lenovo is hiking its prices by 10% as a direct result of the fall in the value of GBP against the USD. The changes will come into force on 1 August 2016.
Lenovo joins Cisco, Dell, HP, and Asus in raising prices following the EU Referendum.
Of course, you mustn’t be worried. Just find a Brexiteer and have them assure you once again that “everything will be OK”. If you are looking for a computer, you may also want to ask the Brexiteer which vendor you should choose – it goes without saying that you must now avoid the likes of Dell, HP, Asus, Cisco, and so on.*
Helllooooo Stone Age…
* Your computer may have a label which says none of these names. Rest assured that INSIDE it probably depends heavily on them.
Not a day goes by without some new piece of negative financial or political fallout from the EU Referendum result. The side of the scales which contain the negative stuff is overflowing – the GBP has plummeted, and continues to do so; ALL the market experts predict uncertainty and negativity; science and technology is already seeing work dry up; and so on.
All that appears on the plus side is deliberate misinformation from the media (remember my recent article on The Sun’s statement that the GBP had “recovered”), and nauseating articles involving interviews with people who voted to leave, and who are now trying to justify what was clearly the wrong decision – like this latest one from the BBC.
Let’s take a look at some of the idiotic comments from people who are simply too stupid to be allowed out unsupervised, and yet who acted all grown up and went to vote last month.
Olivia Prickett, fashion design intern at high couturier Zeynep Kartal, said: “I don’t think we’re broken. It’s turbulent, but it’s salvageable.”
I wonder if Ms Prickett ever realised that we weren’t broken in the first place, and that there was no turbulence from which we needed to salvage anything? So what, precisely, has voting to leave achieved?
The reporter comments:
All the people I met here who voted Out told me they are very happy with the decision. One man even sang for me of his happiness.
Her journalistic skills obviously don’t stretch to wondering why such a person was allowed to vote, that his opinion might be flawed, or that a month down the line his schadenfreude at being on the winning side might not be worth wasting typography on.
David Briers, 43, whom I met at a soup kitchen in Blackpool, also spoke positively. The new prime minister appealed directly to people like David when she said she was determined to make us one nation after the referendum. David supported the out vote because “it will bring more jobs to Blackpool”. Of Theresa May he said: “I think she might be pretty good.”
Here’s another one whose vote clearly had a similar material value to dried-on bird shit. He’s out of work, apparently uses a soup kitchen, and voted to leave the EU because “it will bring more jobs to Blackpool”. Once again, in the absence of any real journalism, one can only guess at his reasoning behind this amazing statement – but it doesn’t take that much effort to imagine that this sudden increase in available work will happen immediately after we deport all the immigrants who are taking jobs away from such honest people. And what about that deep analysis of Theresa May? “I think she might be pretty good”. Jeez.
There is one comment at the end of the article:
We won’t know for years what Britain will be like, post-Brexit.
Stupid, stupid bastards! You voted “out” because your tiny minds told you that come tea time the next day, all the foreigners would be on ships back to continental Europe, that we’d have installed cannon(s) along the south coast to repel any passing Armadas which might try to bring them back, and from now on no one who wasn’t British (and don’t get me started on your warped idea of what “British” means in terms of skin colour) would ever be allowed in again.
A month down the line – apart from the fact that you’re all desperately hoping the EU lets us keep everything we had before, but without having to pay for it – you’re all admitting that the damage you’ve done will take “years” – indeed, whole generations – to put right?
The country wasn’t broken. Now it is, and it’s going to take decades to crawl back up to the position it held pre-Brexit, still with the pro-Remain argument that – on our own – we might never manage that. But hey! Just chant the mantra “it’ll be all right” and stick your head back in the sand.
Katie Razzall is listed as a “special correspondent” on the BBC website. I am guessing that “special” in this sense means “unqualified”, because I can’t believe that someone who was qualified could have missed so many questions in her blatant and naive attempts to side-line the opinions of 48.1% of the population.