|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 12:46:02 GMT
As you know the EU wants no borders, free movement , as we move to ever closer union. The point is ....there is no need whatsoever to even consider the EU in relation to controlling our borders and but we have to. The project is not finished. The issue is not just a UK issue, Hungary and Poland are not too happy about this either , but as financial beneficiaries have to play it carefully.... because of the threats of Guy. Free movement is for 90 days and then dependent on them getting a job - if they can't get a job they have to return to their country - but if there's no border controls or monitoring, they're not going to are they? Please don't blame the EU for the UK's short comings. If we controlled our borders properly, it could. E then rolled out to the other approx 50% who come from other countries ( i.e. Outside the EU) š Capto ( I replied to the wrong post- sorry) I'll try to be brief. I've read your link....it makes no reference to the issues as discussed....why have you posted it. Please could you cut and paste a relevant section , then I could respond. Who are TruPublica, by the way, I wouldn't trust the source myself. You are clearly missing the point again. I understand the conditions for free movement/residency/ three months/ work conditions.... but actually no country in Europe implements them.... impossible in reality in a borderless situation..... Honestly if you show me otherwise I would appreciate it to add to my understanding., even non member Switzerland, are now questioning it. This is the point , as your response demonstrates.........just like any independent, sovereign country ( let's say Japan, or Argentine, or USA) ... we should control our borders without any reference whatsoever to the EU. What's it got to do with them.......I'll tell you....Political and economic CONTROL... ever closer union ( no borders, no national identity) as we move towards a United States of Europe. Likewise the decision to take/ not take " economic migrants " should be ours alone, not based upon a plan or quota of Mrs Merkel...Poland, Hungary ( and Austria) are having problems with this as they try to protect what matters to them... their values and culture..... they would be OUT if they did not lose financially, and we are the fall guys, paying for this experiment. You are correct about the inadequacies of our government.... if/when we leave the problems of the NHS, border control, housing, a future for our youth, Islam integration ( or not), transport, the power of corporations, the country's debt, economics, democracy etc etc remain.... sadly Labour would probably fare worse..... no one actully really represents the working class any more Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/269068/brexit?page=137#ixzz54uuo98aN
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 12:55:46 GMT
As you know the EU wants no borders, free movement , as we move to ever closer union. The point is ....there is no need whatsoever to even consider the EU in relation to controlling our borders and but we have to. The project is not finished. The issue is not just a UK issue, Hungary and Poland are not too happy about this either , but as financial beneficiaries have to play it carefully.... because of the threats of Guy. Yes, well, if you wish to join a club you have to decide whether its beneficial overall. Then, if you do join, as a member you have a voice and voting rights to try to amend things as you see fit. Here in the UK we've effectively decided that its better to be excluded from being able to influence any decisions the club may take which will directly affect us nonetheless. And be excluded from a club which was beneficial overall in so many ways, not least economically over the last 25 years. Barmy. Red, I think that we've been here before. I think that you are saying that you believe in the decision making of this undemocratic, remote, expensive bureaucrats who do not act in our interests ( from my perspective of course) and I believe in the independence and sovereignty of the UK. Economic benefits are very debatable, despite the attempts at fear, ( see reference to Osborne in the previous threads). In my opinion the anti democratic , centralist European empire building, . political intentions of the EU are pretty self evident for those who genuinely want to research it. If you think it is a good idea to give away your democracy that's up to you, but let's try and be clear about what it is all about. To trade does not need a flag, a law court, the 4 freedoms, an army , the dictatorship of " economic migrant quotas" etc etc..... unless of course you are brainwashed into thinking that there is npo other way. Keep giving them money, eh.... they are laughing!
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jan 22, 2018 13:09:21 GMT
Well well osbournes side kick in the treasury has admitted he and all the other remain doom mongers got it wrong again Apparently the economy is not going down but growth is going up better than expected In his own words brexiters are going to be like cats that have got the cream All i want now is the meringue and raspberries to go with it Without a specific link its difficult to know what you're referring to, but if its Lord O'Neill, you might want to reread the article and bear in mind the bits where he says Global growth will come to Britain's aid rather than being out of the EU and how much better our position would be without Brexit. I'm not surprised Smithers misunderstood it. If its not written on a big red bus he's helpless, as his knowledge of cricket shows all too well. "A close Ashes series" doh!
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jan 22, 2018 14:47:02 GMT
I don't think the not so well off or some of the working class feel as though it has been beneficial to them though, sure all the politicians told them they would be less well off, the same politicians who they feel have not served them or improved their lives. So some people may feel that if you're already poor then brexit can't make you poor, or the economic hit would be worth the price to get out of a club which you feel does not serve you're best interests. Thats probably true, but thats probably because they havent been made aware enough of the benefits of being in the EU and, more importantly, the single market for the last quarter of a century. In itself this may have created the very jobs they rely on. The UK benefited greater than most other EU countries from being in the single market, in terms of GDP. If this national success didnt trickle down to the poor, wouldnt that be the fault of our own national policies rather than the EU? The EU doesnt control where industry, business and jobs go, other than providing funds directly to poorer regions of the UK, something which they will no longer receive. So, you could argue that the EU has actually worked to provide for the poor. The fact that the poor voted overwhelmingly to leave is probably an indication of their ignorance over what the EU did in this regard, something our govt should take the blame for, although you do have to bear in mind that governments are desperate to keep our rightwing dominated press onside and that much of this press is owned by non-dom tax dodgers with a vested interest in Britain leaving the EU! The other argument made by the poorer areas is that immigration drives down wages. Yet any analysis of the vote reveals that poor, overwhelmingly white British areas with little or no immigration were way more likely to vote leave. If I remember right the Eu have done a lot for stoke reclaiming the ground at our stadium and surrounds, the land where asda is, the a500 also some of the regeneration projects.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 22, 2018 19:33:11 GMT
Yes, well, if you wish to join a club you have to decide whether its beneficial overall. Then, if you do join, as a member you have a voice and voting rights to try to amend things as you see fit. Here in the UK we've effectively decided that its better to be excluded from being able to influence any decisions the club may take which will directly affect us nonetheless. And be excluded from a club which was beneficial overall in so many ways, not least economically over the last 25 years. Barmy. Red, I think that we've been here before. I think that you are saying that you believe in the decision making of this undemocratic, remote, expensive bureaucrats who do not act in our interests ( from my perspective of course) and I believe in the independence and sovereignty of the UK. Economic benefits are very debatable, despite the attempts at fear, ( see reference to Osborne in the previous threads). In my opinion the anti democratic , centralist European empire building, . political intentions of the EU are pretty self evident for those who genuinely want to research it. If you think it is a good idea to give away your democracy that's up to you, but let's try and be clear about what it is all about. To trade does not need a flag, a law court, the 4 freedoms, an army , the dictatorship of " economic migrant quotas" etc etc..... unless of course you are brainwashed into thinking that there is npo other way. Keep giving them money, eh.... they are laughing! The EU is more democratic than our system. Only a few unelected law makers (1 for each member state selected by their elected MEPs and prime minister/equivalent) compared to the majority in our system (close to 800 Lords v 650 MPs). So its more democratic than our system. It is much, much cheaper for us than our administration. In a recent tax notification from HMRC I was informed that 0.007% of my tax and NI went to the EU budget (of which we get over a 3rd back) that's the lowest amount on anything. 0.02% of my tax and NI was spent on Government administration - nearly 3 times a s much. So it's much cheaper and not expensive as you say. The vast majority of EU law applies to employers, governments and are for the benefit of our citizens. I have quoted this 1000 times on here: competition law, workers rights, etc etc etc etc. A huge list of great law to protect people and that the government of the day cannot easily take away. They are basic rules that ensure businesses operate within certain guidelines of decency towards their consumers afd employees. They are against the richest and most powerful and governments, so are anti-establishment, to stop them abusing our rights. You will respond with your obsession about Ever Closer Union (that nobody can define tangibly). You will mention the army that STILL hasn't appeared. And you will mention sovereignty. We do around half our trade with the EU. We have a say in the rules of that trade. When we leave we will still do more trade with the EU than anybody else (unless we totally destroy our economy!). But we will have zero say on those rules that we will have to abide by. Our regulations on products we sell into the single market will have to mirror the EUs else we cannot sell there. How on earth does that make us more of a sovereign nation when we leave to have no say on the rules for half our trade!?!?!?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 19:42:06 GMT
Red, I think that we've been here before. I think that you are saying that you believe in the decision making of this undemocratic, remote, expensive bureaucrats who do not act in our interests ( from my perspective of course) and I believe in the independence and sovereignty of the UK. Economic benefits are very debatable, despite the attempts at fear, ( see reference to Osborne in the previous threads). In my opinion the anti democratic , centralist European empire building, . political intentions of the EU are pretty self evident for those who genuinely want to research it. If you think it is a good idea to give away your democracy that's up to you, but let's try and be clear about what it is all about. To trade does not need a flag, a law court, the 4 freedoms, an army , the dictatorship of " economic migrant quotas" etc etc..... unless of course you are brainwashed into thinking that there is npo other way. Keep giving them money, eh.... they are laughing! The EU is more democratic than our system. Only a few unelected law makers (1 for each member state selected by their elected MEPs and prime minister/equivalent) compared to the majority in our system (close to 800 Lords v 650 MPs). So its more democratic than our system. It is much, much cheaper for us than our administration. In a recent tax notification from HMRC I was informed that 0.007% of my tax NI went to the EU budget (of which we get over a 3rd back) that's the lowest amount on anything. 0.02% of my tax and NI was spent of Government administration. So it's much cheaper and not expensive as you say. The vast majority of EU law applies to employers, governments and are for the benefit of our citizens. I have quoted this 1000 times on here: competition law, worlers rights, etc etc etc etc. A huge list of great law to protect people and that are against business, the rich or our governments to stop them abusing our rights. You will respond with your obsession about Ever Closer Union (that nobsy can define tangibly). You will mention te army that STILL hasn't appeared. And you will mention sovereignty. We do around half our trade with the EU. We have a say in the rules of that trade. When we leave we will still do more trade with the EU than anybody else (unless we totally destroy our economy!). But we will have zero say on those rules that we will have to abide by. Our regulations on products we sell into the single market will have to mirror the EUs else we cannot sell there. How on earth does that make us more of a sovereign nation when we leave to have no say on the rules for half our trade!?!?!? Oggy We have been over this many times. To be honest I've never heard such nonsense in the debate. I know you prefer to be ruled from the EU than the UK but with respect your arguments just do not make any rational sense, so there is little point in replying again.....do you really think that the autocratic, remote, arrogant EU hierarchy want us to Remain for the benefit of the UK? Surely you don't believe that they have our interests at heart.....perhaps it might be self interest...anyway since the EU have made it a case of taking sides , instead of respecting the UK decision and wishing us well, it is clear whose side you are on.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 22, 2018 19:55:07 GMT
The EU is more democratic than our system. Only a few unelected law makers (1 for each member state selected by their elected MEPs and prime minister/equivalent) compared to the majority in our system (close to 800 Lords v 650 MPs). So its more democratic than our system. It is much, much cheaper for us than our administration. In a recent tax notification from HMRC I was informed that 0.007% of my tax NI went to the EU budget (of which we get over a 3rd back) that's the lowest amount on anything. 0.02% of my tax and NI was spent of Government administration. So it's much cheaper and not expensive as you say. The vast majority of EU law applies to employers, governments and are for the benefit of our citizens. I have quoted this 1000 times on here: competition law, worlers rights, etc etc etc etc. A huge list of great law to protect people and that are against business, the rich or our governments to stop them abusing our rights. You will respond with your obsession about Ever Closer Union (that nobsy can define tangibly). You will mention te army that STILL hasn't appeared. And you will mention sovereignty. We do around half our trade with the EU. We have a say in the rules of that trade. When we leave we will still do more trade with the EU than anybody else (unless we totally destroy our economy!). But we will have zero say on those rules that we will have to abide by. Our regulations on products we sell into the single market will have to mirror the EUs else we cannot sell there. How on earth does that make us more of a sovereign nation when we leave to have no say on the rules for half our trade!?!?!? Oggy We have been over this many times. To be honest I've never heard such nonsense in the debate. I know you prefer to be ruled from the EU than the UK but with respect your arguments just do not make any rational sense, so there is little point in replying again.....do you really think that the autocratic, remote, arrogant EU hierarchy want us to Remain for the benefit of the UK? Surely you don't believe that they have our interests at heart.....perhaps it might be self interest...anyway since the EU have made it a case of taking sides , instead of respecting the UK decision and wishing us well, it is clear whose side you are on. Obviously its self interest! We are a major asset to the EU and each member state. Together the strong are stronger. No attempt to actually argue with me I see. Clearly you are stumped. More sovereignty by being told what our products must be like by the EU that we sell there rather than a collective conversation about it. We lose sovereignty when we leave because we have no say where we trade. All my other points are fact. Its more democratic and cheaper than our government and the laws made are pro citizens. Those are simple facts. You can't argue against them as you have shown. Of I am so wrong you would address each point I have made but you cannot. I wouldn't prefer to be ruled from the EU. But I do think it makes excellent law which do not impose anything too difficult. They provide a baseline of rights for everyday people whose governments cannot take away if an extreme leader is elected. It stops the likes of a Hitler or a Trump.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 20:01:09 GMT
Oggy We have been over this many times. To be honest I've never heard such nonsense in the debate. I know you prefer to be ruled from the EU than the UK but with respect your arguments just do not make any rational sense, so there is little point in replying again.....do you really think that the autocratic, remote, arrogant EU hierarchy want us to Remain for the benefit of the UK? Surely you don't believe that they have our interests at heart.....perhaps it might be self interest...anyway since the EU have made it a case of taking sides , instead of respecting the UK decision and wishing us well, it is clear whose side you are on. Obviously its self interest! We are a major asset to the EU and each member state. Together the strong are stronger. No attempt to actually argue with me I see. Clearly you are stumped. More sovereignty by being told what our products must be like by the EU that we sell there rather than a collective conversation about it. We lose sovereignty when we leave because we have no say where we trade. All my other points are fact. Its more democratic and cheaper than our government and the laws made are pro citizens. Those are simple facts. You can't argue against them as you have shown. Of I am so wrong you would address each point I have made but you cannot. I wouldn't prefer to be ruled from the EU. But I do think it makes excellent law which do not impose anything too difficult. They provide a baseline of rights for everyday people whose governments cannot take away if an extreme leader is elected. It stops the likes of a Hitler or a Trump.[/quote Oggy ive argued with you on the same issues many times before.,.....can't you remember? It's pointless really because you avoid the argument and simply give confluted opinion that you seem to think is convincing fact.Pointless. Just for you to ponder if you want. The EU itself makes it clear that its law is precedent.....or are you going to deny this fact..... From eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l14548Precedence of European law According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law. The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with theĀ direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Definition The CJEU enshrined the precedence principle in theĀ Costa versus Enel caseĀ of 15Ā July 1964. In this case, the Court declared that the laws issued by European institutions are to be integrated into the legal systems of Member States, who are obliged to comply with them. European law therefore has precedence over national laws. Therefore, if a national rule is contrary to a European provision, Member Statesā authorities must apply the European provision. National law is neither rescinded nor repealed, but its binding force is suspended. The Court later clarified that the precedence of European law is to be applied to all national acts, whether they were adopted before or after the European act in question. With European law becoming superior to national law, the principle of precedence therefore ensures that citizens are uniformly protected by a European law assured across all EU territories. Scope of the principle The precedence of European law over national laws isĀ absolute. Therefore, it applies to all European acts with a binding force, whether emanating fromĀ primaryĀ orĀ secondaryĀ legislation. In addition, all national acts are subject to this principle, irrespective of their nature: acts, regulations, decisions, ordinances, circulars, etc), irrespective of whether they are issued by the executive or legislative powers of a Member State. The judiciary is also subject to the precedence principle. Member State case-law should also respect EU case-law. The Court of Justice has ruled that national constitutions should also be subject to the precedence principle. It is therefore a matter for national judges not to apply the provisions of a constitution which contradict European law.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 20:19:15 GMT
The supremacy of EU Law.....giving our sovereignty away.
Lord Bridge in the landmark Factorme case
R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame Ltd
...........
Lord Bridge commented,
If the supremacy within the European Community of Community Law over the national law of member states was not always inherent in the EEC Treaty it was certainly well established in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice long before the United Kingdom joined the Community. Thus, whatever limitation of its sovereignty Parliament accepted when it enacted the European Communities Act 1972 was entirely voluntary. Under the terms of the 1972 Act it has always been clear that it was the duty of a United Kingdom court, when delivering final judgment, to override any rule of national law found to be in conflict with any directly enforceable rule of Community law.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 22, 2018 21:02:38 GMT
"Many countries are". Correct. Germany. Spain. But not the UK. The UK's population will be the size of Germany's by 2050 even if we don't take another single migrant. So, using your logic, remind me again why we need immigration? We need immigration because they do lots of jobs here. From doctors to working in cafes. They make a net contribution to our economy that is far greater than the average Brit (particularly those from the EU). If we shut our borders, we won't be welcome to go anywhere. It would be political and diplomatic suicide to stop all immigration. Scotland do have a top heavy society interms of the elderly. In the UK as a whole it is a problem: from the ONS: As a result of the ageing population the old age dependency ratio (OADR) is increasing. The OADR is the number of people over 65 years old for every 1,000 people aged between 16 and 64 years old ā in mid-2016 the UKās OADR was 285. It is a useful measure to understand how the balance in the population will change, particularly when planning for the needs of the different age groups. This is the bollocks bit..... "We need immigration because they do lots of jobs here." "If we shut our borders, we won't be welcome to go anywhere." "It would be political and diplomatic suicide to stop all immigration." Sweeping generalisations and as far as I'm aware no poster has talked about shutting down immigration by 100%. Classic straw man.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 22, 2018 22:00:20 GMT
We need immigration because they do lots of jobs here. From doctors to working in cafes. They make a net contribution to our economy that is far greater than the average Brit (particularly those from the EU). If we shut our borders, we won't be welcome to go anywhere. It would be political and diplomatic suicide to stop all immigration. Scotland do have a top heavy society interms of the elderly. In the UK as a whole it is a problem: from the ONS: As a result of the ageing population the old age dependency ratio (OADR) is increasing. The OADR is the number of people over 65 years old for every 1,000 people aged between 16 and 64 years old ā in mid-2016 the UKās OADR was 285. It is a useful measure to understand how the balance in the population will change, particularly when planning for the needs of the different age groups. This is the bollocks bit..... "We need immigration because they do lots of jobs here." "If we shut our borders, we won't be welcome to go anywhere." "It would be political and diplomatic suicide to stop all immigration. " Sweeping generalisations and as far as I'm aware no poster has talked about shutting down immigration by 100%. Classic straw man. Whereas you have no argument. If we shut our borders to everyone, what do you think the reaction would be if not negative?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 22, 2018 22:09:05 GMT
Obviously its self interest! We are a major asset to the EU and each member state. Together the strong are stronger. No attempt to actually argue with me I see. Clearly you are stumped. More sovereignty by being told what our products must be like by the EU that we sell there rather than a collective conversation about it. We lose sovereignty when we leave because we have no say where we trade. All my other points are fact. Its more democratic and cheaper than our government and the laws made are pro citizens. Those are simple facts. You can't argue against them as you have shown. Of I am so wrong you would address each point I have made but you cannot. I wouldn't prefer to be ruled from the EU. But I do think it makes excellent law which do not impose anything too difficult. They provide a baseline of rights for everyday people whose governments cannot take away if an extreme leader is elected. It stops the likes of a Hitler or a Trump.[/quote Oggy ive argued with you on the same issues many times before.,.....can't you remember? It's pointless really because you avoid the argument and simply give confluted opinion that you seem to think is convincing fact.Pointless. Just for you to ponder if you want. The EU itself makes it clear that its law is precedent.....or are you going to deny this fact..... From eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l14548Precedence of European law According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law. The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with theĀ direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Definition The CJEU enshrined the precedence principle in theĀ Costa versus Enel caseĀ of 15Ā July 1964. In this case, the Court declared that the laws issued by European institutions are to be integrated into the legal systems of Member States, who are obliged to comply with them. European law therefore has precedence over national laws. Therefore, if a national rule is contrary to a European provision, Member Statesā authorities must apply the European provision. National law is neither rescinded nor repealed, but its binding force is suspended. The Court later clarified that the precedence of European law is to be applied to all national acts, whether they were adopted before or after the European act in question. With European law becoming superior to national law, the principle of precedence therefore ensures that citizens are uniformly protected by a European law assured across all EU territories. Scope of the principle The precedence of European law over national laws isĀ absolute. Therefore, it applies to all European acts with a binding force, whether emanating fromĀ primaryĀ orĀ secondaryĀ legislation. In addition, all national acts are subject to this principle, irrespective of their nature: acts, regulations, decisions, ordinances, circulars, etc), irrespective of whether they are issued by the executive or legislative powers of a Member State. The judiciary is also subject to the precedence principle. Member State case-law should also respect EU case-law. The Court of Justice has ruled that national constitutions should also be subject to the precedence principle. It is therefore a matter for national judges not to apply the provisions of a constitution which contradict European law. You do make me chuckle. You accuse me of not answering your post then rehash a load more of information that in no way addresses what i was talking about. The EU is more democratic than here, cheaper for us than our government, it makes law that to a large extent help citizens rather than big business or government. When we leave we will be less sovereign as we will have no say in the market rules we sell half our exports to. Whereas we have a say in those rules now. Eu law does have primacy over ours which is why our paid holiday can never be taken away, why if we are sold a naff product we can get our money back, why big businesses cannot dominate markets and find it harder to price out small businesses and why our beaches must be at a certain level of cleanliness. Great laws in my view.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 22, 2018 22:19:27 GMT
You do make me chuckle. You accuse me of not answering your post then rehash a load more of information that in no way addresses what i was talking about. The EU is more democratic than here, cheaper for us than our government, it makes law that to a large extent help citizens rather than big business or government. When we leave we will be less sovereign as we will have no say in the market rules we sell half our exports to. Whereas we have a say in those rules now. Eu law does have primacy over ours which is why our paid holiday can never be taken away, why if we are sold a naff product we can get our money back, why big businesses cannot dominate markets and find it harder to price out small businesses and why our beaches must be at a certain level of cleanliness. Great laws in my view. It's not about how great laws are but who makes them and how they are made. Our Parliament can pass any law....but you prefer to believe that we are not capable of doing so but the arrogant EU is......we know whose side you are on
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jan 23, 2018 0:14:14 GMT
Meanwhile...the net is closing on Farage....stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 0:19:51 GMT
This is the bollocks bit..... "We need immigration because they do lots of jobs here." "If we shut our borders, we won't be welcome to go anywhere." "It would be political and diplomatic suicide to stop all immigration. " Sweeping generalisations and as far as I'm aware no poster has talked about shutting down immigration by 100%. Classic straw man. Whereas you have no argument. If we shut our borders to everyone, what do you think the reaction would be if not negative? Bless. Oggy the straw troll. Nobody has mentioned shutting the borders to everyone, apart from you.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 0:22:57 GMT
Meanwhile...the net is closing on Farage....stay tuned. Ha. Don't tell me ... the Russians gave Farage some info that he passed to Assange so Wiki Leaks could fake news the West to help Trump? Please tell me I'm right!?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jan 23, 2018 0:25:49 GMT
Meanwhile...the net is closing on Farage....stay tuned. Ha. Don't tell me ... the Russians gave Farage some info that he passed to Assange so Wiki Leaks could fake news the West to help Trump? Please tell me I'm right!? Stay tuned Rog....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 0:36:13 GMT
Ha. Don't tell me ... the Russians gave Farage some info that he passed to Assange so Wiki Leaks could fake news the West to help Trump? Please tell me I'm right!? Stay tuned Rog.... What's this about Huddy?
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 0:57:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jan 23, 2018 1:16:54 GMT
Nazi boy is in deep deep shit....
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 3:52:44 GMT
Nazi boy is in deep deep shit.... No he's not. Let's see the FISA memo to decide who's in the shit.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jan 23, 2018 7:55:02 GMT
Come on Roger you know the rules I fixed it for you
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jan 23, 2018 8:03:53 GMT
The pound is slowly creeping back up against the Euro, and forecast is optimistic for this year following the economy outlook forecast, investors hope there will be another UK interest rate rise and then the pound will gain further, but will this be at the expense of exports ?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jan 23, 2018 10:37:46 GMT
Oooh
IMF lowers UK growth forecast to 1.5, while Germany raised to 2 and US to 2.5.
Double ooh
PwC says big dose of realism has dented confidence of Britains business bosses.
Hmm, the pound's recovery is an interesting one isnt it. Course this will screw the exports market now which has basically been propping up growth recently. Will inflation fall back to more reasonable levels too?
What is most interesting is wondering how and why the pound has recovered. Given the enormous value it's lost over the last 18 months purely on the back of a vote which hasn't actually changed anything yet, it makes you wonder whether some behind the scenes deals are being cut to deliver a brexit in nothing but name and that this is being slowly fed out.
In other words, we'll end up with being nominally outside the EU but with little other differences visible and more than likely paying handsomely to access the single market.
Be afraid, boys, be very afraid!
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jan 23, 2018 10:43:19 GMT
Genuine question - is this linked too them shutting down their government for a couple of days or is the poud actually strengthening? I'm fed up of the euro getting closer to 1:1.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jan 23, 2018 11:14:07 GMT
The pound has been strengthening for some time, ever since the idea of a hard brexit got knocked for six.
If May continues to head off the headbangers in her party and deliver brexit in name only as she is trying to do, it'll carry on.
Conversely, no deal or a harder brexit will take us back to where we were.
As long as we are nominally out of the EU I suspect most people in Britain would be glad its 'over' and wont care much about the details. Only the real brexit headbangers in the Tory party will still be whining for more.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 12:42:17 GMT
Genuine question - is this linked too them shutting down their government for a couple of days or is the poud actually strengthening? I'm fed up of the euro getting closer to 1:1. Been on the rise, generally for over a year.... GBP/USD 12 months - BBC
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jan 23, 2018 12:47:25 GMT
The original populist is now the saviour of the EU's fight against populism. LMFAO. Bunga Bunga
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jan 23, 2018 13:22:06 GMT
Berlusconi has always been centre right, but make it up as you go along if you like, Roge!
Would you prefer 5SM which believes in public water, sustainable transport, sustainable development, free intetnet access, degrowth and environmentalism? Not even anti EU any more! Doesnt sound like your bag at all lol
Meanwhile, Norway's PM urges UK to have softest brexit possible.
It's not going well, boys, not going well at all.
Will we notice any difference at all post Mar 2019 bar being excluded from decisions?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 23, 2018 13:36:12 GMT
Whereas you have no argument. If we shut our borders to everyone, what do you think the reaction would be if not negative? Bless. Oggy the straw troll. Nobody has mentioned shutting the borders to everyone, apart from you. So you agree with me, immigration is a good thing.
|
|