Let us start with the rhetoric. In January Theresa May said that “no deal is better than a bad deal”. When polls ask about that sentiment people generally agree with it. When Theresa May first made the statement, YouGov found 48% of people agreed that “no deal is better than a bad deal”, 17% thought a “bad deal was better than no deal” (34% agreed with neither or said don’t know). SkyData asked a similar question at the start of the month and found 74% of people thought no deal was better than a bad deal, 26% that any deal was better than no deal.

These two questions suggest that the Prime Minister has landed upon a message that chimes with the public, but we don’t know what respondents are thinking of as a “bad deal” or “no deal”, and whether they think a “no deal” is a good thing or just marginally less awful than a “bad deal”. More in depth questions asked around a “no deal” Brexit suggest it would not be widely welcomed.

Questions that have asked specifically about whether people see a “no deal” Brexit as good or bad have consistently shown a negative reaction. In ICM’s most recent poll they asked how people would react if “negotiations failed to reach agreement by Brexit Day, and the UK left the EU in a so-called ‘hard Brexit’?” 62% of people picked negative words, like worried (50%), confused (29%) and furious (24%), only 20% picked positive words like pleased (14%), proud (11%) or excited (11%).

YouGov asked if people thought it would be good or bad for Britain if we ended up leaving the EU without agreeing departure terms with the EU at all – 57% thought this would be bad, 10% thought it would be good for the country, 20% said neither. Survation asked a very similar question in June (but without a neither option) and found 58% thought it would be bad for Britain, 31% good for Britain.

Of course, this is somewhat missing the point. Given there is significant public support for the sort of Brexit that Theresa May has set out (of immigration controls *and* a trade deal with the EU), a “no deal” Brexit is unlikely to be seen as desirable by the public. It is more a case of whether it is seen as acceptable if negotiations for a better Brexit fall through.

Last week YouGov asked what the government should do if we get to the end of the two year negotiation period and the government have not managed to strike the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is seeking: 18% of people said we should stay in the EU after all, 17% that we should delay Britain’s departure in order to continue negotiations, 16% that Britain should accept some of the EU’s demands in order to reach a compromise, 32% that Britain should leave without a deal. Looking at those who voted to Leave in 2016 and those who voted Tory in 2017, a majority of both groups say Britain should leave without a deal rather than seek to delay Brexit or compromise with the EU.

Opinium’s last poll had a very similar question, but with slightly different options. They also asked what people thought should happen if we got to the end of the two year negotiation period without a deal – 15% said we should remain in the EU after all, 35% that we should have a transition deal while negotiations continued, 44% that we should leave without a deal. Again, a majority of Tory voters and Leave voters said that under those circumstances we should leave without a deal.

Summing it all up, a “no deal” Brexit is not something that the British public actually like the idea of – the majority tend to see it in negative terms or as being bad for Britain. However, placed in a position where negotiations for a better deal have failed, a sizeable minority of people (and a majority of Conservatives and Leave voters) would opt for a “no deal” Brexit. Put in that choice between a rock and a hard place, more people would opt for “no deal Brexit” than would opt for remaining in the EU, though a sizeable chunk would take the option of compromise or delay if offered.


1,441 Responses to “What the public think about a “No deal” Brexit”

1 27 28 29
  1. @TREVOR WARNE
    ‘…
    Whoever takes over from May should do the following quickly IMHO (mostly after actually become leader of course!):
    1/ reach across chamber and get LAB and SNP involved in a national govt approach to Brexit (devo-max for Scotland)’

    @Neil J
    Now I know you are having a laugh, there is no way this would ever happen unless DD adopted Labour/SNP Policies whole sale, which I think is very unlikely

    Just to be clear in case people are unintentionally confused by your post the above was my reply to your suggestion of reaching across.
    to LabouR and the SNP

  2. @ PETE – I’m not religious. I’m polite to the Jehovah Witness folks that knock on my door every 5yrs – more often in the recent past! I glance at their leaflet, some of their ideas look good but I don’t see enough that appeals to me to want to join or vote for them. I understand others may chose to join or vote for them but it doesn’t matter how many knock on my door or how many leaflets I get I’m not going to join and at some point you watch enough Momentum videos and hear enough from the devout members that you tactically endorse a different faith – even if you don’t like much of what they preach, you just think it’s a slightly less bad way to run the country :)

  3. @ NIELJ – Just to be clear the use of italics and quote marks indicates errr oh, a quote!
    So let’s take your other part “there is no way this would ever happen unless DD adopted Labour/SNP Policies whole sale, which I think is very unlikely”

    Two points:
    – it would not need to be “wholesale” but yes it would most certainly mean the removal of Hammond, ending austerity and Corbyn/Sturgeon-lite
    – as i explained this jesture was intended to call LAB’s bluff on Brexit and form a temporary tactical alliance with SNP.

    I can see LAB’s inability to break the tiny lead over CON is getting you flustered. With CON performing so horrifically perhaps if/when some good news comes we’ll see if CON regain the lead. I’m very concerned CON and LAB are now so divisive that we will see little churn between the parties but with CON near rock bottom then the only way is up!

    How do you think 18-24 and 24-35 sectors would react to Hammond changing student loan interest to CPI (that saves 40k of lifetime interest for a graudate with 50k of debt)? I just hope they get someone in that can spin that and highlight how LAB quietly reneged on the suggestion of cancelling debt fro graduates.

  4. TW Nov 8th 6:09
    While Protestants have no need to repent as they only need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven.
    Mind, often Christians forget this part of the Bible:
    James 2,20
    But wilt thou knowe, O vaine man, that faith without workes is dead?

    Protestants do need to repent; but this is not the same thing as ‘penance’ as understood in Catholic theology. Repentance is a complete reversal, or turning in a new direction, whereas penance is saying ‘sorry’ (I cold say more but you can search through the theology books yourselves if you wish).

    That Protestants ‘only need to believe in Jesus Christ’ makes it sound rather like the easy option. I can assure the reader that, in today’s world, believing in Jesus Christ is no easier than it was in the first three centuries of the Church.

    And in any case, faith in Jesus Christ is not something to which the adjective ‘only’ can be applied with any degree of coherence. ‘Alone’ is the correct translation of the adjective – Solus Christus.

    The quotation from the Letter of James is totally misleading, as James is writing about the life of those who already have faith, and are called to live in response to the salvation they have received. He is not saying that salvation is dependent on works (pace Luther q.v. on James).

    The quotation from James is also undermined by being from the Authorised Version, which is rarely of use in our generation – after all, it was considered rather ‘old fashioned’ by the end of the 18th century!

    Now, what had any of that to do with polling?

  5. @John Pilgrim

    ‘something to do with immigration; – Could we a)clarify the position that EU migrants here have to be able to support themselves and their dependents and have an insurance type of claim on our welfare which relates to their payment of taxes etc? If we added to that removing students from the figures, an assertion that we can remove people for illegal activities irrespective of the ECJ, some assertive leadership that we need EU immigration and can’t get by without it and some policies needed to deal with the downsides (enforcing minimum wage etx) would that count as a game changer? Doesn’t feel like it to me but it all depends on how you tell it,

    Are there any other possible additions? I was recently told that there is an EU directive on including peoples email addresses on emails sent to other parties. It sounded like good sense to me but I wasn’t clear that it had much to do with the EU. Are there areas of legislation like this that do not bear too directly on free trade etc that could be defined and clearly stated to have nothing to do with the EU?

    What might be in it for EU = perhaps other countries would like something like that and it might be a start of regularising a two speed/inner and out ring or whatever Europe which in the end is what they are going to have.

  6. Come on Trev please don’t slip back in to your old ways.

    Not that reneging again on a non-commitment line again.

    Your main point is valid though and Paul Croft myself and other Lab supporters would agree that the incremental voter is likely to continue prove difficult for Labour to attract.

    They seem to be close to their limit under the current leadership which may or may not be the same limit under a different leadership.

    However, I do expect some increase in lead as some Tory 2017 voters drift to WV/DK increasing Labours share by default and a little bit from demographic changes.
    Also I think Rachel is right about differential turnout v polls favouring Labour at the next GE as the ‘get rid of the Tories’ desire reaches 1997 levels and Tory supporters remaining WV on the day ends up a bit higher than 2017.

    Conclusion Labour most votes and probably seats at next GE but OM elusive imo.

    NB) I got 2015 and 2017 wrong so what the hell do I know?

  7. @Danny

    You asked for evidence of stamp duty influencing transactions.

    My longer response is in moderation.

    However, when the Government raised stamp duty for buy to lets, the number of transactions fell from 164,000 in March 2016 to 96,000 in April 2016.

    If you raise the rate, transactions appear to fall.

  8. Millie,

    Is it likely that rushing deals through to beat the increase affected that particular month on month change?

  9. john pilgrim,
    “have our cake and suck it up”
    I like it.

    R Huckle,
    ” have a binding Brexit vote”

    I dont know why MPs, pundits and even people here have such difficulty with the concept of democracy. No vote is binding. Thats an essential part of democracy. It only has effect until the next one, if it even has effect that long (which it usually does not).

    Trevor Warne,
    60% of people do not want hard Brexit, which is the only sort on offer at the moment. Can you take this into consideration when making suggestions?

  10. @ Oldnat

    Thank you very much for the kind comments.

    @ TW

    Whilst many amendments may look similar the change of one word can have significant consequences e.g. in the White Paper the Henry VIII clauses allowed the minister to change the law when “necessary” the Bill as set out now allows the minister to change the law when “appropriate”, necessary creates legal strictures that can be considered on Judicial review that are much more onerous than those for the word appropriate, the former requires the rationale to show that the desired aim of the change to the law was required in order to allow some particular existing EU legal position to be maintained and that this could not be achieved without the particular change in the law proposed, therefore the rationale on change would be based on two elements (1) Whether the change would preserve an EU position that could be lost and (2) That there was no method of achieving this without change to the law. The use of the word appropriate preserves point one but then only considers whether a change the law was a reasonable means of achieving the aim. It can be seen that the level of power granted to a minister by the latter is a world away from that granted by the former.
    Additionally, the Bill for the first time ever introduces the potential for quangos to make law, this tertiary legislation arises so that an agency which replaces a current European agency function, can lay regulations for that agency.
    The debate on such matters it seems to me should be substantial and not cursory.
    I understand that the Parliamentary process is to debate groups of amendments in order to have some hope of dealing with them.
    As far as promises to give sufficient time, the government’s record on this is not good in the last year.

  11. Millie,
    ” when the Government raised stamp duty for buy to lets, the number of transactions fell from 164,000 in March 2016 to 96,000 in April 2016.”

    Similar arguments raged about labour’s hike in top rate tax, and conservatives dropping it again: Very hard to untangle short term and long term behaviour, or external factors such as the general economy. Changing the tax base conceptually, eg such as having a serious charge on property transfers or reintroducing capital gains taxes on all house profits, would undoubtedly affect the market, and it would be an aim to push down prices overall. But people will still need to live in them and buy to let will adjust to the new profit margins, etc. Property prices must come down for the good of the economy.

  12. @John B

    Now, what had any of that to do with polling?

    Nothing IMHO but it was good to read. One of the delights of UKPR is that one gets information on so many things from theology to thorium to the niceties of the distinction between ‘appropriate” and “necessary” .

  13. With May’s warning to her party that Brexit will happen come what may, is this the time where we see whether there is greater loyalty to the Conservative Party or to what those particular reamin type MP’s consider the best interests of the nation?

  14. reamin? I ameant Remain

  15. Bl*(&*^*&%^* keyboard driving me nuts

  16. Boy do we need some polls.

  17. WB: Bl*(&*^*&%^* keyboard driving me nuts
    PEBKAC perhaps?

  18. @R HUCKLE

    Stubbington (Fareham) result:
    LDEM: 55.2% (+32.4)
    CON: 35.8% (+6.1)
    UKIP: 5.4% (-37.9)
    LAB: 3.5% (-0.5)
    LDem GAIN from UKIP.

    That is a truly remarkable result, with voters seemingly transferring their allegiance from the most anti-EU party to the most pro-EU more or less lock,stock and barrel.
    Part of it can no doubt be explained by the ineptitude of UKIP politicians in office (from what I’ve seen) but if anyone can demonstrate why this has not got a lot to do with an a realisation of the lunacy of Brexit I’d be obliged to them.

  19. @ JIM JAM – OK, apologies. I would say CON are in general under represented on this ‘non-paritsan’ site but I respect your opinion and take note.

    I agree most of your points are a risk to CON (and CON have only one ‘mate’ so they are most at risk in a hung parliament)

    “Tory 2017 voters drift to WV/DK increasing Labours share by default” could argue that from both sides. IF Hammond defies my fears and adopts a generous budget, specifically the student loan fee change AND Corbyn stays too quiet on Brexit then IMHO part of the youth/Remain vote could be less committed to LAB. Apathy less of an issue in CON core vote. IMHO.

    Corbyn is offering something very different to Blair. For some (who are surely already in LAB VI) that is the attraction but for many that rules him out. After the rule changes any new leader will come from the same Union-Momentum fold as Corbyn – 3rd generation Bennite. I will concede the younger voters probably at some point need to see that this does not work – hopefully not at the exact same time as leaving the EU (Blair’s view of populist right punch followed by popular left). NB over half of youth are not students! CON need to target them as much as students (I think they ignore that)

    As I’ve said many times I’m OK with LAB in a Remain (EEA+CU) position. I may be wrong about the unions, etc and whilst I want to be free of ECJ the Bennite reasons to leave the EU are very different to the core Leave’s reasons. Let’s see if 1970s policies work this time round on a ‘lite’ version. Keynes generally views the failure of Keynes as the need for more Keynes and that is my concern of LAB-Leave.

    “Conclusion Labour most votes and probably seats at next GE but OM elusive imo.”
    As it stands yes, but we saw a 20pt move in 7weeks. Much will depend on how, why and when the next GE is called.

    Pre Brexit or Post Brexit is a huge difference. Do Remain stay with LAB or do we see LDEM resurgence? If Brexit is watered down too much do we see UKIP resurgence? If CON drop austerity do they win back some marginal voters? If either party changes leader will that make a difference?

    As Rudyard would say – it is all to play for!

  20. Some anecdotal doorstep data. We Labourites have been out in some Tory wards getting ready for next year’s council elections (despite not having selected candidates yet)
    To our absolute astonishment, these very remainy wards which have never ever returned anything but Tory councillors all had a Lab majority in the GE.
    We thought that was to do with the excellent MP, young Corbynthusiasm, protest vote etc. With the council putting up council tax and parking charges and making draconian cuts we expected the usual hostility on the doorsteps and derision at the idea they would vote Lab in a council election.
    This is definitely not what we’re hearing: quite dyed-in-the-wool Tories giving is what looks like genuine consideration

  21. @ WB – thank you for your reply. I would like sensible amendments but it does appear May might finally have learnt the art of “spin”. If she can show this as frustration tactics then folks might side with her.

    The issue is the DUP meaning for the maths to work we need CON rebels for “frustration” to be visible. If May cracks the whip and the CON rebels fold it will look like tyranny and hence back fire.

    IMHO it will all be in the spin, sadly something CON seem inept at.

    If it was me, I’d quickly agree all the sensible LAB amendments and bring them inside the Leave tent. CON (under May) have really messed that up, allowing LAB to look like the sensible party and able to keep up a high degree of ambiguity.

    All IMHO of course

  22. Danny,

    “Property prices must come down for the good of the economy.”

    for the last forty years house prices have been driving the economy…hell for at least part of that time in the South East house prices were the economy.

    Pre the financial crash almost 8 out of ten UK loans were for property purchases. we didn’t so much become a home owning society as a home trading one.

    Peter.

  23. As we wait for more polls, the story about the 58 ‘impact studies’ the government doesn’t want to publish has faded from the news. Pity, because I found it the most interesting of the many recent political stories. What’s going on? has Bercow lost his teeth? Are civil servants at this moment struggling to hide the sheer incompetence and inaccuracy of these studies, (and hence the unpreparedness of the DexEU)? Or equally desperately redacting out the bits that show what a complete disaster it’s going to to be? Or twiddling their thumbs and delaying as much as they can in the hope that by the time these are published everyone will have lost interest anyway?

    Labour seem more bothered now by Priti Patel. Which might be interesting behind the scenes gossip, but we’ll have to wait for her memoirs.

  24. Guymonde

    I’ve noticed a few of these wholesale switches from UKIP to Lib Dem. I’m guessing it’s the “all politicians are masturbaters” types that don’t really care about policies cos they don’t trust anyone.

  25. JIM JAM

    Since you mentioned me with respect to polling/Labour’s position etc I thought I’d offer some vague thoughts.

    There seems to be a possible diversion between general polling – which, given how generally awful the government’s position seems to be regarded at the moment, is extremely encouraging for them – and what might happen at a REAL election.

    Obviously everything depends on when that will be, who the main party’s leaders will be and the state of the EU “withdrawal”.

    But if the Labour party’s local campaigning is better than the Tories; and if there is a widespread ABT vote, fuelled in part by an increase in remain inclined voters, then Labour might win a lot of seats.

    However, Corbyn [despite the adulation] is actually BEHIND May [despite her humiliation[ in current, “best PM” polls.

    Which might suggest that, if he stays and if the Tories get a more popular and populist leader, then it could go the other way.

    Since that means I haven’t got a clue as to what actually WILL happen that is probably my most accurate prediction so far on this site.

    [But something will.]

  26. Paul Croft, I think it has been suggested on here a few times that being in office as PM is likely to inflate your best PM score.

    Also, you and TW are forgetting that it is Labour’s new policy direction that is popular.

    I do not think that Labour’s support is tied to JC being leader but is dependent on the party continuing to offer a raft of more progressive policies.

  27. The conservative rules.

    After some extended googling I found the conservative rule book on an website from Albania.

    http://politike.al/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Statuti-i-Partise-Konservatore-Britani.pdf

  28. guymonde: Stubbington (Fareham) result:
    LDEM: 55.2% (+32.4)
    CON: 35.8% (+6.1)
    UKIP: 5.4% (-37.9)
    LAB: 3.5% (-0.5)
    LDem GAIN from UKIP.

    That is a truly remarkable result, with voters seemingly transferring their allegiance from the most anti-EU party to the most pro-EU more or less lock,stock and barrel.
    Part of it can no doubt be explained by the ineptitude of UKIP politicians in office (from what I’ve seen) but if anyone can demonstrate why this has not got a lot to do with an a realisation of the lunacy of Brexit I’d be obliged to them.

    I am not so sure that there is much ‘Road to Damascus’ conversion in this. I very much doubt that many individuals have actually made a journey from UKIP to LD

    Remember that the likely largest party by far, DNV, is not shown in the results. I would say that the journeys of individuals are
    ** from UKIP to Con and DNV [possibly Leave voters?]
    ** from Con and DNV to LD [possibly Remain voters?]
    giving an apparent mass exodus from UKIP to LD

    If you look at the apparent mass exodus, you could think that people are realising the folly of Brexit. But to me this looks more like a change of levels of passion, with Leavers becoming more apathetic and Remainers becoming more angry.

  29. As TOH seems to have stopped flagging up economic stats, can I be permitted to hail the UK’s improved trade performance? Exports to the EU (especially cars) are bounding ahead, while exports to RoW are fallng.

    Good news, clearly. But maybe not welcome to ardent brexiters…

    Breaking: Britain’s trade deficit has narrowed by £700m, partly due to a rise in exports to European countries.

    The gap between what Britain imports and exports fell to £2.75bn in September, a better result than expected.

    … The report also shows that the UK exported £900m more goods to European countries in the three months to September, but sold £1.7bn LESS to non-EU countries.

    Imports of goods from both EU and non-EU countries increased, by £1.7bn and £1.5bn respectively over the last quarter.

    Here’s the official explanation of how Britain grew its exports to the EU in the last quarter:

    “Exports of goods to non-EU countries decreased by £1.7 billion (3.8%) between the three months to June 2017 and the three months to September 2017. As shown in Figure 2, this was due to decreases in exports of fuels (£1.6 billion) and chemicals (£1.0 billion), which offset increases in exports to non-EU countries of other commodities over the same period.

    Exports of goods to EU countries increased by £0.9 billion (2.2%) between the three months to June 2017 and the three months to September 2017. The main contributor was increases in exports of transport equipment (predominately cars), which increased by £0.7 billion.” (Guardian)

  30. We had a fascinating documentary about Donald Trump`s activities over the last 10 years in Scotland on BBC Scotland last night.

    It was fascinating not so much from what we learnt about Donald as about how the other politicians and senior administrators involved have changed their attitudes and have not been good at prediction.

    E.g. Ruth Davidson – “Trump will never become US President”.

    Ten years ago, Trump had already left a trail of very angry investors and politicians around the world, and wriggled through several bankruptcies. But the Scottish Government heads, Jack McConnell and then Alex Salmond, shut their ears. Likewise many of the Aberdeenshire councillors involved in deciding on his “World-beating” golf course and luxury resort. Jack was even suspicious when he spotted that Trump had a microphone hidden behind his tie recording their talks, but still went along with this “major” investment.

    Alex Salmond also was wriggling on the doc about how he got the Menie development called in, and had meetings in a mixed capacity of local MSP and Government head. AS seems now to have evolved from an astute politician with a grasp of detail, into a comedy or chat-show performer. Let`s hope Boris goes the same way.

    The programme ended in comedy style with shots of the Mexican flag up aloft on the periphery of the Menie course. Trump had a wall built around this property so the residents would lose their views, in an attempt to drive them out of their home. But the wall has now been put to use as a permanent irritant.

    The moral for our politicians grappling with Brexit meantime is listen to all the facts, not just those you want to hear. And don`t allow powerful companies and people to buy up the media, or block important studies such as is now happening at Westminster.

  31. @trevorwarne

    “For SNP, if you read all the Brexit info realised by DExEU you’ll see devo-max has been verbally offered ….”

    Devo-max has no single definition but is often stated as being (in short hand) as the devolution of.everything except.foreign affairs and defence ( and probably some elements of fiscal and monetary policy). I have seen nothing to suggest that devo max has been offered verbally or otherwise. Indeed, the issue is maintaining the existing devolution settlement. Please link to.some examples of the info which leads you to your conclusion.

  32. Davwel,

    Thanks for the Trump documentary synopsis.

    Just a slight quibble or is a cavil?

    Re ”AS seems now to have evolved from an astute politician with a grasp of detail, into a comedy or chat-show performer. Let`s hope Boris goes the same way.”

    Your probably unintentionally implied that Johnson like AS was once an astute politician with a grasp for detail.

  33. Barniere

    there must be “sincere and real progress” anyone know if this is more or less stringent than “sufficient progress”?

    Two weeks to sort out the money or no trade talks in December
    I am not sure we will ever commence trade talks: at the moment I can’t see agreement on what TW calls the minimum deal: I am ever so depressed about my children’s future prospects!

  34. New thread

  35. Peter Cairns,
    ““Property prices must come down for the good of the economy.”

    for the last forty years house prices have been driving the economy”

    Exactly. Firstly the Bof E was warning that this process was nearing the buffers in 2007 because of the sheer amounts being borrowed. Bit of an interruption, but we have not normalised this situation. Secondly, The proportion of spending going into housing is way more than cost, and has distorted the entire economy..

    News Says Davis will not allow special status for northern Ireland, and Uk exports to the world outside the EU just fell. The EU wants details about money. Would be nice if things kick off in parliament at last, but in this game of endless stalling I would not be amazed if we are still faffing around by next christmas.

  36. @Jim Jam

    Yes, there was undoubtedly a rush to beat the deadline. However, it does illustrate that those involved n property transactions are very conscious of stamp duty.

    I also recall that there used to be an artificial tax ‘cliff’ at £250,000. Stamp duty jumped £5,000 at that point. This mean that precious few transactions were conducted at £255,000! All kinds of shenanigans happened to avoid the extra payment.

    The whole issue is difficult to unravel, but there is pretty strong evidence that reducing stamp duty at the top end would significantly increase transactions to the point where revenue might correspondingly increase.

    It is generally accepted that more transactions benefit the economy in several ways, including allowing people to move to more appropriate accommodation, nearer their place of work ,etc.

  37. JJ:

    Yes, I worded badly.

    I know Boris was never good on detail, although an astute politician.

    I remember him once grumbling about how his constituents were subsidising Scots. But he had misunderstood the Treasury balance sheet, and turned a negative into a positive.

  38. CHARLES
    “Could we a)clarify the position that EU migrants here have to be able to support themselves and their dependents and have an insurance type of claim on our welfare which relates to their payment of taxes etc? …”

    My sense – not a prediction but a hypothesis – is that if a package similar to this emerges from already occurring proposals on EU borders and international labour markets as part of an offer from the EU, that might be seen as justifying remaining.

  39. Paul Croft,
    “However, Corbyn [despite the adulation] is actually BEHIND May”

    May is not the tories problem. Their problems are leave and austerity. For those that believe in those things, of course, those are their advantages.

    Millie,
    “It is generally accepted that more transactions benefit the economy in several ways, including allowing people to move to more appropriate accommodation”

    but you just argued for ” reducing stamp duty at the top end “. How can a redution ‘at the end’ help most people?

  40. JOHN B, interesting. To be honest I was directing my post more towards evangelical Americans, who oft seem to believe just believing in Jesus is enough to get to heaven. There really the only protestants I’ve discussed religion with (but i do to be fair search the nutters out on youtube).

    I’m not religious, but interested.
    ‘The quotation from the Letter of James is totally misleading, as James is writing about the life of those who already have faith, and are called to live in response to the salvation they have received. He is not saying that salvation is dependent on works (pace Luther q.v. on James).’

    Can you explain the salvation part again? I read it as i you don’t do works then your faith is pointless. What’s the point of being a Christian if you don’t live a Christian life? And yes your slvaton is void.

  41. Also, saying, ‘ I can assure the reader that, in today’s world, believing in Jesus Christ is no easier than it was in the first three centuries of the Church’, really depends on where you live. Some parts of America it would be hard being an atheist.

1 27 28 29