|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 21, 2019 11:43:17 GMT
As the government struggle to deliver Brexit by 31st October, the daily scare stories are being trotted out by the media, with their negative slant on a no deal Brexit, which no one wants but no one is prepared to compromise their position on. Yesterday, we have the food scare that cheap none European food imports would put British farmers out of business. No comments of course that it would be much better for the poor to have cheaper food when we leave the EU, or the benefits to those third world countries that are desperate for foreign exchange by selling agricultural products to the West to which the EU put up a barrier. No mention that farmers benefit from the EU Common Agricultural Policy to the tune of c 4 billion Euro pa which of course is our own money which we could give agriculture directly and more objectively to suit our needs. No mention that French farmers receive over double British farmers, or that a lot of the money doesn't go to farmers but French food processors. Or that Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland all receive substantially more than the UK. capreform.eu/gainers-and-losers-from-the-cap-budget/The CAP is one of the reasons that the EU is desperate to prevent us leaving as we subsidise Europe. There will no doubt be a shortage of Dutch and Spanish tomatoes, but great news for Morocco! The media talk about how dependant we are on Europe for food, but fail to point out the biggest import sector is French, Spanish, Italian, and German wine. Well tough we will just have to buy from the rest of the world. Today we have had the scare that UK fuel plants will be threatened by cheap imports of fuel from outside the EU. Lower fuel prices would be a benefit to our economy. The government can flex fuel prices by taxation. No mention that lower fuel prices will be a huge benefit to farmers production costs, and the cost of transport of all goods within the UK. What will tomorrow's scare story be? Its funny that, because I think the main scare story is not actually being reported hardly at all. The one we should all be really nervous about. That is, we are sleepwalking into trade agreements that are going to make us totally subservient to the USA. This has been the driving force from the right from the beginning. This was the reason I voted against Brexit, not because I like the EU in any way shape or form, but because the alternatives are so obviously disturbing and dangerous, and the motivations behind from the prime movers (alt-right) should have been obvious too. The US are getting more vocal in this process day by day and open advocating no-deal Brexit. You have ask yourselves Why? They are not because they have our interests at heart. This is the US of A!!!! Johnson has 3 meetings planned with Trump before Brexit date! Trump undermining of May's deal was inevitable. Its not about whether that deal was ok for us, it's about whether it was OK for them. They have Johnson on a string...but dont worry about him, he'll get his payoff alright! Look at how hostile US has been towards any deals with China (Huawei) I think we can expect more anti-Chinese news in the future that's for sure regardless of the situations there. End of NHS, private insurance, rampant capitalism. I'm not a Socialist by any means, but this is going to be horribly divisive, rich getting richer etc, etc. Any of the injustices of the EU are going to seem like small fry. Trump doesn't need Greenland really (though he will always get as much as he can) because he is being handed an island right here on a plate and the major proponents (not you or I btw!) will all get their big pay days.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 21, 2019 11:45:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 21, 2019 11:53:11 GMT
As the government struggle to deliver Brexit by 31st October, the daily scare stories are being trotted out by the media, with their negative slant on a no deal Brexit, which no one wants but no one is prepared to compromise their position on. Yesterday, we have the food scare that cheap none European food imports would put British farmers out of business. No comments of course that it would be much better for the poor to have cheaper food when we leave the EU, or the benefits to those third world countries that are desperate for foreign exchange by selling agricultural products to the West to which the EU put up a barrier. No mention that farmers benefit from the EU Common Agricultural Policy to the tune of c 4 billion Euro pa which of course is our own money which we could give agriculture directly and more objectively to suit our needs. No mention that French farmers receive over double British farmers, or that a lot of the money doesn't go to farmers but French food processors. Or that Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland all receive substantially more than the UK. capreform.eu/gainers-and-losers-from-the-cap-budget/The CAP is one of the reasons that the EU is desperate to prevent us leaving as we subsidise Europe. There will no doubt be a shortage of Dutch and Spanish tomatoes, but great news for Morocco! The media talk about how dependant we are on Europe for food, but fail to point out the biggest import sector is French, Spanish, Italian, and German wine. Well tough we will just have to buy from the rest of the world. Today we have had the scare that UK fuel plants will be threatened by cheap imports of fuel from outside the EU. Lower fuel prices would be a benefit to our economy. The government can flex fuel prices by taxation. No mention that lower fuel prices will be a huge benefit to farmers production costs, and the cost of transport of all goods within the UK. What will tomorrow's scare story be? Its funny that, because I think the main scare story is not actually being reported hardly at all. The one we should all be really nervous about. That is, we are sleepwalking into trade agreements that are going to make us totally subservient to the USA. This has been the driving force from the right from the beginning. This was the reason I voted against Brexit, not because I like the EU in any way shape or form, but because the alternatives are so obviously disturbing and dangerous, and the motivations behind from the prime movers (alt-right) should have been obvious too. The US are getting more vocal in this process day by day and open advocating no-deal Brexit. You have ask yourselves Why? They are not because they have our interests at heart. This is the US of A!!!! Johnson has 3 meetings planned with Trump before Brexit date! Trump undermining of May's deal was inevitable. Its not about whether that deal was ok for us, it's about whether it was OK for them. They have Johnson on a string...but dont worry about him, he'll get his payoff alright! Look at how hostile US has been towards any deals with China (Huawei) I think we can expect more anti-Chinese news in the future that's for sure regardless of the situations there. End of NHS, private insurance, rampant capitalism. I'm not a Socialist by any means, but this is going to be horribly divisive, rich getting richer etc, etc. Any of the injustices of the EU are going to seem like small fry. Trump doesn't need Greenland really (though he will always get as much as he can) because he is being handed an island right here on a plate and the major proponents (not you or I btw!) will all get their big pay days. yep - that sure is a big scare story you are telling. A veritable whopper.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 21, 2019 12:01:13 GMT
Its funny that, because I think the main scare story is not actually being reported hardly at all. The one we should all be really nervous about. That is, we are sleepwalking into trade agreements that are going to make us totally subservient to the USA. This has been the driving force from the right from the beginning. This was the reason I voted against Brexit, not because I like the EU in any way shape or form, but because the alternatives are so obviously disturbing and dangerous, and the motivations behind from the prime movers (alt-right) should have been obvious too. The US are getting more vocal in this process day by day and open advocating no-deal Brexit. You have ask yourselves Why? They are not because they have our interests at heart. This is the US of A!!!! Johnson has 3 meetings planned with Trump before Brexit date! Trump undermining of May's deal was inevitable. Its not about whether that deal was ok for us, it's about whether it was OK for them. They have Johnson on a string...but dont worry about him, he'll get his payoff alright! Look at how hostile US has been towards any deals with China (Huawei) I think we can expect more anti-Chinese news in the future that's for sure regardless of the situations there. End of NHS, private insurance, rampant capitalism. I'm not a Socialist by any means, but this is going to be horribly divisive, rich getting richer etc, etc. Any of the injustices of the EU are going to seem like small fry. Trump doesn't need Greenland really (though he will always get as much as he can) because he is being handed an island right here on a plate and the major proponents (not you or I btw!) will all get their big pay days. yep - that sure is a big scare story you are telling. A veritable whopper. I admire your complacency. I just find it bizarre that folk are happy to swap one kind of dependency for another. One I think that will be far more restricting and through which we will be greater weakened (apart from a very elite few) You have to supremely naive to think that Trump has not got an Endgame here.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 21, 2019 13:13:55 GMT
The thing that concerns me with the yanks is that they would use a trade deal as a way of dragging us into more wars with them, under trump they also have a tendency to just unilaterally pull out of deals at the drop of a hat, can they be trusted ?
|
|
|
Post by melbournestokie21 on Aug 21, 2019 13:32:11 GMT
Aussie here Posted this on the corbyn thread but hoping for replies specifically about brexit and uk politics in general as an outsider. Mums not a fan of the toris though she has a thin grasp of politics (grandad was a miner in Biddulph when the pits were closing) So presumably labour was the working class party back then? My question however is, I know pretty much nothing about uk politics.. just wondering if labour there is the same as the party over in Aus.. More concerned with social change and virtue signalling rather than actual issues (at the face of it anyhow). Im naturally inclined to side with the toris as im a fan of the ironically named liberal party here, given I feel like I lean more towards having conservative values but wouldnt go as far as identifying as one idk. Is anyone willing to explain brexit to me as an outsider? And with that why Coates is fanatical remainer (does he have genuine reasons other than self interest with bet365) I know almost nothing about brexit but assume at the face of it its a backlash over England not needing the EU as much as it needs them. Immigration, funding etc? Whats the key issue of it all? It's difficult to be objective across such a wide range of subjects but I will do my best, some of what I say will obviously be based on my own experience and beliefs so disclaimer: I'm a labour voter who would probably be classed as a democratic socialist, my favourite politician was Tony Benn who is well worth a listen to, and a read of his diaries regardless of your political alignment. So if you're ready for a little essay/missive: Your mum not being keen on the Tories is a common theme felt here in the many parts of the UK particularly in the post-industrial North/Midlands as she shifted the UK out of what was called the "post-war consensus", which was essentially a Keynesian economics based system with a mixed economy (nationally owned utilities and public services, allowances for private enterprise albeit somewhat taxed.) The consensus was managed in the same fashion by both Labour and the Conservative party until 1979 when Margaret Thatcher beat James Callaghan in the general election triggered by a no-confidence vote in the Labour government (lost by one vote) At this time the UK was known as the sick man of Europe and suffered immensely from un-competitive nationally owned businesses and trade unions strong-arming the government into unsustainable wage agreements (albeit ones driven by payment gaps due to rapidly uncontrallable inflation) which culminated in the "winter of discontent" of 1978-79 in which large trade unions went on strike resulting in rubbish not being collected, graves not being dug and picket lines outside hospitals. So, Thatcher won the 1979 election and made control of inflation at any cost her modus operandi. Based on the economics of Milton Friedman she cut the monetary supply, reduced direct taxes and cut public spending in a lot of different fields such as education, health, social housing, energy etc. The economy started to crash and the industries of the North and Midlands caught the brunt of it, and inflation still remained incredibly high despite dropping slightly since the Labour government. There were around 2.5 million people unemployed in 1981 when her popularity reached the lowest recorded level for a sitting prime minister. Anyway to fast forward a bit after thr Falklands War in 1982 (the British public like nothing more than a quick war) her popularity stabilised and the economy recovered sufficiently enough to easily win the 1983 general election, which is where Thatcherism went into overdrive. The nationally owned industries were sold off for a quick buck, previous Tory Prime Minister Harold MacMillan accused her of "selling the crown jewels". Next she began steps to deregulate Britain's financial markets to transition the UK from a manufacturing economy to a service and financially based one. The only problem with this was the fact most people in Birmingham and beyond were employed directly in manufacturing. The confrontation with the Unions was inevitable but unlike previous Prime Ministers she prepared herself. She effectively crippled the unions through a mix of legislation, under-cutting their labour (coal for instance, was brought in for 1/10th of the price from South Africa ahead of the miners strike) and they have never recovered to anywhere near what I would personally consider an effective level (I think they were too powerful in the 70s however). Entire communities dependent on manufacturing collapsed and a deep seated hatred for conservatives and Thatcher emerged which I would say still persists in many communities to this day. Her rhetoric didn't help either, referring to the Unions and their members as "the enemy within" What I would say about this period is that the decline of UK manufacturing was inevitable, but Thatcher was callous in how it was carried out and it was transitioned far too quickly leaving many immensely skilled people out of a job for life. What Tony Benn referred to "a complete and utter contempt for skill". Thatcher pressed on with her economics and deregulated the stock market in 1986 and the economy boomed as financial services flocked to London. She won the 1987 election with consumate ease against Neil Kinnock who was in the process of reforming the Labour Party from a socialist party to a more centrist one. Thatcher's demise came when she supported changes to council tax in the form of a poll tax. That is to say, charging each person individually for council tax as opposed to charging based on the rental value of a house. This naturally effected the poorer members of society. She lost the support of her cabinet and resigned from office and was replaced by John Major. I'm boring myself now so I'll wrap up quickly as possible. Labour were now almost completely reformed into a centrist party led by Tony Blair. The Tories were suffering major scandals and after 18 years in government were grossly unpopular with a lot of people. Without the usual defence of saying Labour were marxist dinosaurs to fall back on, Labour annihilated the Conservatives in 1997. Winning over 400 seats out of 659. Blair barely touched the reforms made by the previous Tory governments but did spend more money on education sectors. In Health he actively continue the marketisation brought in under Thatcher. He also committed a lot more money to the welfare state during this time but this was offset in other areas, such as bringing in tuition fees for students. Iraq permanently damaged his popularity though so he resigned in 2007 replaced by Gordon Brown who got slapped in the face of the economic crash in 2008. He later admitted they should have made greater steps to regulate the financial sector in their 13 years in power. They lost the general election to a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition led by David Cameron who pursued austerity (quite similar to Maggie's initial policies) to counter the deficit. The arse fell out of public services and I personally would argue we've still not full recovered in this country. Such auysterity led to the need to create a "credible" opposition to the Tories and with changes to the Labour leadership elections a genuinely left-wing candidate was elected leader, Jeremy Corbyn. The trouble is, Corbyn is just about the least appealing leader that the members could have chosen to appeal to middle England (basically the marginal seats you have to claim to win a GE). He was traditionally a protest MP, and has associated with causes some deem unpalletable. He also carried Labour into forms of identity politics and social justice, which again a lot of people don't view as electable. That all depends on your point of view. In Normal circumstances, the party lines would be fairly drawn in the sand but Brexit has completely clouded the issue on every topic you can think of. Corbyn as a socialists is pre-disposed against the EU but has revised his position whilst in the post-industrial cities the EU (this is completely my opinion) has been used as a scapegoat for their woes, when in reality its the governments of the last 20-30 years that have left them behind to follow the pound sterling elsewhere. That said, there are plenty of legitimate arugments to take up with the EU on more or less any issue you can think of, particularly how democratic it is or not, policies of free movement, greatyer integration, hence this mess. It's very difficult to pigeon hole as a set of issues because everyone has different priorities. Essay over, hope it helps clear at least some things up for you. (and sorry all for the massive post) Thankyou very much for that mate, showed my mum as well and opened her eyes and refreshed her memory. Cheers for replying!
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 21, 2019 13:59:27 GMT
The thing that concerns me with the yanks is that they would use a trade deal as a way of dragging us into more wars with them, under trump they also have a tendency to just unilaterally pull out of deals at the drop of a hat, can they be trusted ? US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump?
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 21, 2019 14:28:04 GMT
The thing that concerns me with the yanks is that they would use a trade deal as a way of dragging us into more wars with them, under trump they also have a tendency to just unilaterally pull out of deals at the drop of a hat, can they be trusted ? US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump? He'll probably offer to buy England next.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 21, 2019 14:33:48 GMT
yep - that sure is a big scare story you are telling. A veritable whopper. I admire your complacency. I just find it bizarre that folk are happy to swap one kind of dependency for another. One I think that will be far more restricting and through which we will be greater weakened (apart from a very elite few) You have to supremely naive to think that Trump has not got an Endgame here. You do raise a good question - albeit in a classic knicker wetter way. What will be our relationship with the US post Brexit? Well, we don’t know. It might be great, it might not be. But it isn’t inevitable one way or another. Let’s hope whoever pieces it together does a better job than TM managed on the Brexit WA. In the meantime, I guess we’ll have folk like you peddling your scare stories and soiling your underwear.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 21, 2019 14:33:53 GMT
The thing that concerns me with the yanks is that they would use a trade deal as a way of dragging us into more wars with them, under trump they also have a tendency to just unilaterally pull out of deals at the drop of a hat, can they be trusted ? I'd say No chance. Everyone has their own opinions but I personally think that if we leave the EU we'll have to fully get into bed with the US. They already drag us into every conflict and I think their influence over us is (and will be) much greater and worse than that of the EU.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 21, 2019 14:37:20 GMT
US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump? He'll probably offer to buy England next. Trump is that daft I wouldn’t put it past him to buy Port Vale.
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Aug 21, 2019 14:37:50 GMT
US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump? He'll probably offer to buy England next. Once he's seen BJ's "White cliffs of Dover" video presentation … he will be falling over to buy it.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Aug 21, 2019 14:46:29 GMT
He'll probably offer to buy England next. Trump is that daft I wouldn’t put it past him to buy Port Vale. Steady!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 21, 2019 14:58:53 GMT
Trump is that daft I wouldn’t put it past him to buy Port Vale. Steady! True. There’s daft and there’s daft. Even Trump probably ain’t that daft.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 21, 2019 15:43:40 GMT
I admire your complacency. I just find it bizarre that folk are happy to swap one kind of dependency for another. One I think that will be far more restricting and through which we will be greater weakened (apart from a very elite few) You have to supremely naive to think that Trump has not got an Endgame here. You do raise a good question - albeit in a classic knicker wetter way. What will be our relationship with the US post Brexit? Well, we don’t know. It might be great, it might not be. But it isn’t inevitable one way or another. Let’s hope whoever pieces it together does a better job than TM managed on the Brexit WA. In the meantime, I guess we’ll have folk like you peddling your scare stories and soiling your underwear. Well we live in a age of knicker wetting and scare stories. It is knicker wetting and scare stories that have driven the political agenda for decades and got us where we are. Remember Red Ed Miliband who was going to lead us to a Stalinist Totalitarianism according to the Daily Telegraph. Well, we'll never know. That's largely how modern politics works. Everything is a scare story especially when you have made up your mind to take an opposing course. I don't think you need to be too concerned though. My point was about how this is being largely ignored by media despite some pretty hard evidence to suggest that it is a significant player in this whole soap drama.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 21, 2019 16:08:35 GMT
The thing that concerns me with the yanks is that they would use a trade deal as a way of dragging us into more wars with them, under trump they also have a tendency to just unilaterally pull out of deals at the drop of a hat, can they be trusted ? US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump? What a load of rubbish spitty! The first thing to remember is that the USA is a democracy and in a few years Trump will be history just like Reagan, Bush1 and 2, Clinton, and Obama - the man who would get rid of Guantanamo Bay. The USA constitution prevents a single person or group running the show with a free hand as Trump is finding out. The HoR, Senate and Judiciary split the power between them. If you know America well you will realise that it is actually 50 states and there is the world of difference between them; they are almost like 50 countries, well not quite - all the New England states are similar, and there are others, - but West Virginia is like a different planet to most of the other states. The USA, along with our Commonwealth colleagues, has been our best ally for generations and helped us rid the tyranny of Hitler and Mussolini. But some people still want to snuggle up to European countries who are happy to bleed us dry. Fortunately we have a large trade balance with the USA which keeps lots of British in work. fullfact.org/economy/trade-deficit-surplus-USA-EU/Some people don't know which side their bread is buttered.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 21, 2019 16:09:13 GMT
As the government struggle to deliver Brexit by 31st October, the daily scare stories are being trotted out by the media, with their negative slant on a no deal Brexit, which no one wants but no one is prepared to compromise their position on. Yesterday, we have the food scare that cheap none European food imports would put British farmers out of business. No comments of course that it would be much better for the poor to have cheaper food when we leave the EU, or the benefits to those third world countries that are desperate for foreign exchange by selling agricultural products to the West to which the EU put up a barrier. No mention that farmers benefit from the EU Common Agricultural Policy to the tune of c 4 billion Euro pa which of course is our own money which we could give agriculture directly and more objectively to suit our needs. No mention that French farmers receive over double British farmers, or that a lot of the money doesn't go to farmers but French food processors. Or that Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland all receive substantially more than the UK. capreform.eu/gainers-and-losers-from-the-cap-budget/The CAP is one of the reasons that the EU is desperate to prevent us leaving as we subsidise Europe. There will no doubt be a shortage of Dutch and Spanish tomatoes, but great news for Morocco! The media talk about how dependant we are on Europe for food, but fail to point out the biggest import sector is French, Spanish, Italian, and German wine. Well tough we will just have to buy from the rest of the world. Today we have had the scare that UK fuel plants will be threatened by cheap imports of fuel from outside the EU. Lower fuel prices would be a benefit to our economy. The government can flex fuel prices by taxation. No mention that lower fuel prices will be a huge benefit to farmers production costs, and the cost of transport of all goods within the UK. What will tomorrow's scare story be? Its funny that, because I think the main scare story is not actually being reported hardly at all. The one we should all be really nervous about. That is, we are sleepwalking into trade agreements that are going to make us totally subservient to the USA. This has been the driving force from the right from the beginning. This was the reason I voted against Brexit, not because I like the EU in any way shape or form, but because the alternatives are so obviously disturbing and dangerous, and the motivations behind from the prime movers (alt-right) should have been obvious too. The US are getting more vocal in this process day by day and open advocating no-deal Brexit. You have ask yourselves Why? They are not because they have our interests at heart. This is the US of A!!!! Johnson has 3 meetings planned with Trump before Brexit date! Trump undermining of May's deal was inevitable. Its not about whether that deal was ok for us, it's about whether it was OK for them. They have Johnson on a string...but dont worry about him, he'll get his payoff alright! Look at how hostile US has been towards any deals with China (Huawei) I think we can expect more anti-Chinese news in the future that's for sure regardless of the situations there. End of NHS, private insurance, rampant capitalism. I'm not a Socialist by any means, but this is going to be horribly divisive, rich getting richer etc, etc. Any of the injustices of the EU are going to seem like small fry. Trump doesn't need Greenland really (though he will always get as much as he can) because he is being handed an island right here on a plate and the major proponents (not you or I btw!) will all get their big pay days. How do we know Trump will get another 4 year turn, end of 2020 is his first term isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Aug 21, 2019 16:10:21 GMT
True. There’s daft and there’s daft. Even Trump probably ain’t that daft. Make Vale Wank Again?
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 21, 2019 16:27:20 GMT
Its funny that, because I think the main scare story is not actually being reported hardly at all. The one we should all be really nervous about. That is, we are sleepwalking into trade agreements that are going to make us totally subservient to the USA. This has been the driving force from the right from the beginning. This was the reason I voted against Brexit, not because I like the EU in any way shape or form, but because the alternatives are so obviously disturbing and dangerous, and the motivations behind from the prime movers (alt-right) should have been obvious too. The US are getting more vocal in this process day by day and open advocating no-deal Brexit. You have ask yourselves Why? They are not because they have our interests at heart. This is the US of A!!!! Johnson has 3 meetings planned with Trump before Brexit date! Trump undermining of May's deal was inevitable. Its not about whether that deal was ok for us, it's about whether it was OK for them. They have Johnson on a string...but dont worry about him, he'll get his payoff alright! Look at how hostile US has been towards any deals with China (Huawei) I think we can expect more anti-Chinese news in the future that's for sure regardless of the situations there. End of NHS, private insurance, rampant capitalism. I'm not a Socialist by any means, but this is going to be horribly divisive, rich getting richer etc, etc. Any of the injustices of the EU are going to seem like small fry. Trump doesn't need Greenland really (though he will always get as much as he can) because he is being handed an island right here on a plate and the major proponents (not you or I btw!) will all get their big pay days. How do we know Trump will get another 4 year turn, end of 2020 is his first term isn't it? Absent an economic downturn I think he’s nailed on for 4 more years.
|
|
Moosehead
Youth Player
Posts: 307
Location: Nottingham
|
Post by Moosehead on Aug 21, 2019 16:59:31 GMT
True. There’s daft and there’s daft. Even Trump probably ain’t that daft. Make Vale Wank Again? Again?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Aug 21, 2019 17:30:56 GMT
You leave voters really don't know what you've done. Think of the children.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 21, 2019 17:42:55 GMT
Anything that gets through parliament, by definition, won’t be brexit, because parliament doesn’t want brexit, they will only pass a BRINO agreement.
For brexiteers it’s no deal or no brexit now.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Aug 21, 2019 17:43:29 GMT
US is conflict orientated, anything to get an edge on the competitors. US has been taken over by a group of fanatics hell bent on global domination, that is no secret to anyone. They don't even make a secret of it anymore! Its not just Trump, either, there is a very powerful lobby at work here. The way to get around being regarded as fanatics is to call everyone else a fanatics and to demonise them, which is easy to do given that most countries are run by self serving egotists and the EU has been fairly easy to demonise lets face it. We have always been pretty servile to US interests, but this is going to make that servility even more inevitable. The overwhelming evidence is there with Iran and China, its fairly easy to raise the tensions because the stakes are so high, it also seems to be getting easier to manipulate public opinion with social media tools and fake news, and any real news being dismissed with fake news etc, etc. But I would expect more conflict as we increase our dependence on US interests and get locked into agreements which are going to be loaded in their favour. How could anyone in their right minds make a reasonable case for trusting Trump? He'll probably offer to buy England next. Scotland could be a possibility
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Aug 21, 2019 17:53:18 GMT
How do we know Trump will get another 4 year turn, end of 2020 is his first term isn't it? Absent an economic downturn I think he’s nailed on for 4 more years. Correct. A lot of damage can be done in five years. He will have us by the goolies and won't let go.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Aug 21, 2019 18:03:19 GMT
Absent an economic downturn I think he’s nailed on for 4 more years. Correct. A lot of damage can be done in five years. He will have us by the goolies and won't let go. There's no such thing as wardrobe monsters, it's the burglars breaking in through your window you need to be worried about. Sweet dreams!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 22, 2019 4:55:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on Aug 22, 2019 5:40:53 GMT
The only thing Macron nails is his pals while his beard wife goes to bingo. Assuming they have bingo in France? The French still have a blind spot for their role second world war. They take any chance they get to have a dig at Britain's alliance with the US. They're a funny bunch.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 22, 2019 5:47:10 GMT
The only thing Macron nails is his pals while his beard wife goes to bingo. Assuming they have bingo in France? The French still have a blind spot for their role second world war. They take any chance they get to have a dig at Britain's alliance with the US. They're a funny bunch. Just deflecting away from the point. W2 has nothing to do with this. What's important is now and the future. .
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 22, 2019 6:22:14 GMT
The only thing Macron nails is his pals while his beard wife goes to bingo. Assuming they have bingo in France? The French still have a blind spot for their role second world war. They take any chance they get to have a dig at Britain's alliance with the US. They're a funny bunch. Just deflecting away from the point. W2 has nothing to do with this. What's important is now and the future. . WW2 casts a long shadow over Europe - not surprisingly. Particularly for France and Germany (for different reasons - obviously!) As far as France is concerned that shadow has roots going back to 1870. The need for France, epitomised by de Gaulle during and after WW2, to be accepted as a global power is still at the heart of French politics which explains their attitude towards Britain and America. Because, they see a relationship between the UK and the US as diminishing their status.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 22, 2019 6:29:38 GMT
Just deflecting away from the point. W2 has nothing to do with this. What's important is now and the future. . WW2 casts a long shadow over Europe - not surprisingly. Particularly for France and Germany (for different reasons - obviously!) As far as France is concerned that shadow has roots going back to 1870. The need for France, epitomised by de Gaulle during and after WW2, to be accepted as a global power is still at the heart of French politics which explains their attitude towards Britain and America. Because, they see a relationship between the UK and the US as diminishing their status. So you don't think that the US are taking advantage of the situation and that we'll end up getting our pants pulled down in whatever trade deal/s we sign with them? Just sounds like people are clutching at straws here and naive to what's really going on. Whatever hang ups France has about WW2 is immaterial.
|
|