|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 8:25:05 GMT
I thought that the issue was that Brexit waS preventing them from coming. And it is not similar at all. Most who voted to leave thought that they would be stopping them coming Very similar shite living conditions, usually old caravans, shared bathrooms, wages docked for not meeting quotas etc. They choose and want to come. It isn't similar at all. You seem obsessed with immigration/ foreigners. Those who voted leave simply want control over our own affairs. Are you doing the classic deflection...the Guardian and Ecowatch seem to think that what is happening in Spain is an issue. ....... A 2015 report in NaturPhilosophie noted that, in addition to the massive human rights problems, the area is plagued with depleted aquifers, the largest desalination plant in Europe to keep water flowing into the greenhouses, and rising cancer rates due to pesticide exposure among workers. Waste from the “farms" is reported to run off into the Mediterranean Sea, including the chemical waste, plastic waste and human waste of the workers. Entire industries have popped up in the area simply to make the massive amount of plastic for the greenhouses which has a short lifespan and is sometimes discarded, strewn across the landscape or washed into the sea.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:00:45 GMT
Interesting, although at no point at all in that article is any indication given that it's anything to do with Brexit, more a legal, takeover protection/demerger and coronavirus move. No it seems to have happened like many things" in spite of Brexit". Good news though eh, or do you wish that it had not happened. Yes, exactly, so largely irrelevant to the Brexit discussion as I originally said.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:03:34 GMT
Interesting, although at no point at all in that article is any indication given that it's anything to do with Brexit, more a legal, takeover protection/demerger and coronavirus move. Oh so when it's bad news it's Brexit When it's good news it's despite Brexit Nope, the Nissan article specifically dealt with requests for additional guarantees in the event of a no deal Brexit. Timmypotters article doesn't mention Brexit once. I just wondered what the reason for putting it on this thread was? People will attach their own narratives I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:09:34 GMT
It is not really worthy of a reply , but I've got a minute. 2017....remember the concerted effort to thwart Brexit...hard brexit/ soft brexit etc....when the media were being whipped up to do everything they could to oppose democracy. A sample of 2000. Laughable....how were they selected? I could easily claim to be a Brexiteer who was misled. Nothing whatsoever since 2017....no groundswell by Brexiteers, so you make my point for me. Polls notoriously wrong, some would say a deliberate attempt to influence public opinion. Mind you we've had two polls since the referendum when the misled Brexiteers had a chance to vent their anger, the EU elections and the General Election...I think that they did. You do know how opinion polling works? They don't ask everyone in the country, you know. It's a representative sample. 2,000 is fairly standard actually. I just mentioned it in response to your claim that there was no feeling of being betrayed or misled amongst Brexit voters. Clearly one survey indicated that there was quite a significant feeling. But that was three years ago. People have since voted to get it over and done with because they're sick of hearing about it. We'll have to wait and see whether what transpires matches Leavers expectations when they voted, but that'll be in five to ten years' time.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:09:55 GMT
No it seems to have happened like many things" in spite of Brexit". Good news though eh, or do you wish that it had not happened. Yes, exactly, so largely irrelevant to the Brexit discussion as I originally said. Not irrelevant...a good example of the fear campaign and the futility of predicting the future with total certainty...you'd certainly bring it up with relish if it had gone the other way.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:11:59 GMT
It is not really worthy of a reply , but I've got a minute. 2017....remember the concerted effort to thwart Brexit...hard brexit/ soft brexit etc....when the media were being whipped up to do everything they could to oppose democracy. A sample of 2000. Laughable....how were they selected? I could easily claim to be a Brexiteer who was misled. Nothing whatsoever since 2017....no groundswell by Brexiteers, so you make my point for me. Polls notoriously wrong, some would say a deliberate attempt to influence public opinion. Mind you we've had two polls since the referendum when the misled Brexiteers had a chance to vent their anger, the EU elections and the General Election...I think that they did. You do know how opinion polling works? They don't ask everyone in the country, you know. It's a representative sample. 2,000 is fairly standard actually. I just mentioned it in response to your claim that there was no feeling of being betrayed or misled amongst Brexit voters. Clearly one survey indicated that there was quite a significant feeling. But that was three years ago. People have since voted to get it over and done with because they're sick of hearing about it. We'll have to wait and see whether what transpires matches Leavers expectations when they voted, but that'll be in five to ten years' time. I certainly do know how they work and how some people try to use them. Do you know how elwctions work? They do have a slightly bigger sample.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jun 11, 2020 9:13:31 GMT
I could easily claim to be a Brexiteer who was misled.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:13:59 GMT
I thought that the issue was that Brexit waS preventing them from coming. And it is not similar at all. Most who voted to leave thought that they would be stopping them coming Very similar shite living conditions, usually old caravans, shared bathrooms, wages docked for not meeting quotas etc. Immigration reached one of its highest levels ever recently. Not from the EU though, from elsewhere. Precisely the places we are able to control already! That's ok, these are all good migrants! I suspect the distinction will soon be lost on those who thought they were voting because there were too many immigrants, the country's full etc...
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:15:12 GMT
Yes, exactly, so largely irrelevant to the Brexit discussion as I originally said. Not irrelevant...a good example of the fear campaign and the futility of predicting the future with total certainty...you'd certainly bring it up with relish if it had gone the other way. Just reacted to the FT article timmypotter posted in which there was a distinct absence of Brexit...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:15:27 GMT
Most who voted to leave thought that they would be stopping them coming Very similar shite living conditions, usually old caravans, shared bathrooms, wages docked for not meeting quotas etc. Immigration reached one of its highest levels ever recently. Not from the EU though, from elsewhere. Precisely the places we are able to control already! That's ok, these are all good migrants! I suspect the distinction will soon be lost on those who thought they were voting because there were too many immigrants, the country's full etc... Are you obseessed by immigrants?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:17:48 GMT
You do know how opinion polling works? They don't ask everyone in the country, you know. It's a representative sample. 2,000 is fairly standard actually. I just mentioned it in response to your claim that there was no feeling of being betrayed or misled amongst Brexit voters. Clearly one survey indicated that there was quite a significant feeling. But that was three years ago. People have since voted to get it over and done with because they're sick of hearing about it. We'll have to wait and see whether what transpires matches Leavers expectations when they voted, but that'll be in five to ten years' time. I certainly do know how they work and how some people try to use them. Do you know how elwctions work? They do have a slightly bigger sample. Straw man. You claimed there was little or no feeling of betrayal or being misled. I showed you there was. We can talk about elections as well if you want?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:18:51 GMT
Not irrelevant...a good example of the fear campaign and the futility of predicting the future with total certainty...you'd certainly bring it up with relish if it had gone the other way. Just reacted to the FT article timmypotter posted in which there was a distinct absence of Brexit... The demise of industry and armageddon was made an issue by Remainers
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:18:54 GMT
Immigration reached one of its highest levels ever recently. Not from the EU though, from elsewhere. Precisely the places we are able to control already! That's ok, these are all good migrants! I suspect the distinction will soon be lost on those who thought they were voting because there were too many immigrants, the country's full etc... Are you obseessed by immigrants? No, just interested in how record numbers fit into the whole taking back control thing?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:22:17 GMT
Are you obseessed by immigrants? No, just interested in how record numbers fit into the whole taking back control thing? Don't get what you mean. Taking back control is a simple concept in terms of our relationship with the EU.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 11, 2020 9:28:01 GMT
I've no idea if this is true, perhaps some posters may know something about it. It could have been posted on a " BLM" type thread or environmental. Surely the EU should be looking at this. .............. By 2011, a news report in The Guardian said that more than 100,000 workers toil away inside the greenhouses, many living in “inhuman" slums and laboring in the chemical stew. The report noted: “Migrant workers from Africa living in shacks made of old boxes and plastic sheeting, without sanitation or access to drinking water.Wages that are routinely less than half the legal minimum wage.Workers without papers being told they will be reported to the police if they complain.Allegations of segregation enforced by police harassment when African workers stray outside the hothouse areas into tourist areas." A 2013 documentary film, The Morrocan Slaves of El Ejido, Spain (Esclave marocain a El Ejido, Espagne), chronicled the plight of the migrant workers toiling inside the hot greenhouses as well as their difficult lives outside of work. www.ecowatch.com/europes-dirty-little-secret-moroccan-slaves-and-a-sea-of-plastic-1882131257.html?xrs=RebelMouse_fb#27c7dWell I shall do my bit no Spanish food stuff will enter my house until they clean there act up I wonder what the posters with alleged a ethical social policies will do My wife has never liked the taste of Spanish or Moroccan tomatoes and always preferred the taste of British, Dutch, or on occasionally Polish. Check it out. I've always been off tomatoes since I was expected to water my father's crop as a boy.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:28:55 GMT
No, just interested in how record numbers fit into the whole taking back control thing? Don't get what you mean. Taking back control is a simple concept in terms of our relationship with the EU. You asked me if I'm obsessed with immigrants. I said no, I'm just curious as to whether record numbers of migrants is what Leavers voted for when they wanted to take back control which was specifically cited repeatedly in relation to immigration. As here:https://brexitcentral.com/brexit-must-mean-taking-back-control-immigration-policy/
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 11, 2020 9:29:04 GMT
Well I shall do my bit no Spanish food stuff will enter my house until they clean there act up I wonder what the posters with alleged a ethical social policies will do My wife has never liked the taste of Spanish or Moroccan tomatoes and always preferred the taste of British, Dutch, or on occasionally Polish. Check it out. I've always been off tomatoes since I was expected to water my father's crop as a boy. My mother always rated Dutch tomatoes for some reason
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 9:35:08 GMT
Don't get what you mean. Taking back control is a simple concept in terms of our relationship with the EU. You asked me if I'm obsessed with immigrants. I said no, I'm just curious as to whether record numbers of migrants is what Leavers voted for when they wanted to take back control which was specifically cited repeatedly in relation to immigration. As here:https://brexitcentral.com/brexit-must-mean-taking-back-control-immigration-policy/ You do seem obsessed with it, and don't seem to understand taking back to control.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 11, 2020 9:39:42 GMT
Don't get what you mean. Taking back control is a simple concept in terms of our relationship with the EU. You asked me if I'm obsessed with immigrants. I said no, I'm just curious as to whether record numbers of migrants is what Leavers voted for when they wanted to take back control which was specifically cited repeatedly in relation to immigration. I voted to stop uncontrolled immigration. But that is not the main reason (probably 5th actually), the main reason is in your post, namely "to take back control". Something the EU is still determined to prevent, it would appear from the reported progress on negotiations, where we expected to be subservient to countries like Canada and Japan in terms of agreement. The longer things go on, the more I am coming round to the dreadful view that we are better leaving without an agreement and take the pain. We would be in a much stronger position to negotiate, and the EU would be falling over themselves to avoid damaging their massive positive trade balance.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:40:59 GMT
You asked me if I'm obsessed with immigrants. I said no, I'm just curious as to whether record numbers of migrants is what Leavers voted for when they wanted to take back control which was specifically cited repeatedly in relation to immigration. As here:https://brexitcentral.com/brexit-must-mean-taking-back-control-immigration-policy/ You do seem obsessed with it, and don't seem to understand taking back to control. With reference to that Brexitcentral link I posted, do you think the recent decade-high numbers of immigrants achieves the aim of taking back control of our borders in the way those Leavers who voted for a reduction in immigration would want? For all I know, you might be one. Enlighten me.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 9:43:20 GMT
You asked me if I'm obsessed with immigrants. I said no, I'm just curious as to whether record numbers of migrants is what Leavers voted for when they wanted to take back control which was specifically cited repeatedly in relation to immigration. I voted to stop uncontrolled immigration. But that is not the main reason (probably 5th actually), the main reason is in your post, namely "to take back control". Something the EU is still determined to prevent, it would appear from the reported progress on negotiations, where we expected to be subservient to countries like Canada and Japan in terms of agreement. The longer things go on, the more I am coming round to the dreadful view that we are better leaving without an agreement and take the pain. We would be in a much stronger position to negotiate, and the EU would be falling over themselves to avoid damaging their massive positive trade balance. An alternative view www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/473bd2ae-4ee5-11e9-b401-8d9ef1626294 Financial Times SIGN IN Brexit The Brexit delusion of taking back control The UK is a large minnow, but still a minnow, in a very big lake Sheep Wheel March 26, 2019 4:15 pm by Martin Wolf From Beijing, where I now am, the UK looks small. It also looks as if it has fallen into the hands of lunatics engaged in an astonishing act of national self-harm. But this, Brexiters will say, is an illusion. The UK is going to “take back control”. The slogan was brilliant. But it was the biggest delusion of all. Control is different from sovereignty. As I argued during the referendum campaign, the UK was already sovereign: it could, if it wished, vote to leave the EU. It did so, but promptly discovered that, while it was sovereign, it was not very powerful. Yet control is about power. In the post-referendum negotiations with the EU it has turned out, as informed people knew it would, that the EU was more powerful than the UK. This was so for a simple reason: it could impose far heavier penalties on the UK than the UK could on the EU. Britain sends 47 per cent of its exports of goods to the EU, while the rest of the EU sends 15 per cent of its exports to the UK. For the EU, the UK market is important. For the UK, the EU’s is vital. Welcome to the harsh world of international relations. We have been frequently reminded that the UK is the fifth (soon to be sixth) largest economy. That is true, but misleading. The world contains three economic superpowers: the US, the EU (without the UK) and China. These generated about 60 per cent of global output last year. The UK’s contribution was 3 per cent. It is large for a minnow, but still a minnow. So what might “control” mean for a small island country about to separate itself from its neighbours and closest economic partners? In some areas, it will be able to exercise control. But these are where it has always been able to do so. The UK’s net contribution to the EU was just 1.1 per cent of total public spending in the latest financial year. The EU has no significant influence over the UK’s spending on (or policies towards) health, education, housing, pensions, welfare, infrastructure, culture or, for that matter, defence and aid. In one rather intimate domestic area the UK does risk losing control: its own survival. The futures of Northern Ireland and Scotland within the UK have both been destabilised by Brexit. So where might Britain gain the control it now lacks? Obvious examples are those economic regulations that have fallen within the ambit of the EU’s competition policy, rules on state aid and the bloc’s single market. It is correct that if the UK left the EU completely, it could abandon an active competition policy and waste large amounts of money in propping up failed companies. Why it should view either as attractive is a mystery. The UK has largely unbridled control over its domestic affairs, for good or (too often) for ill. But it is an open, trading nation and, given its size and limited resources, has no future as anything else. It is a modest power in a big world: 2019 is not 1860. It depends on the behaviour of other sovereign countries. The EU has significantly increased the influence of Britain in a host of negotiations, notably over trade and climate. That will be gone. So, too, will influence over the EU’s policies towards the UK, as the withdrawal negotiations have already shown. But, we are told, the country can open up markets all over the world, to compensate for the loss of favourable access to the market of 450m people on its doorstep. Unfortunately, that would not be true even if the rest of the world were to be obliging, because the EU markets are so crucial for the UK. Moreover, the rest of the world is not going to be obliging. The US is in the process of demolishing the World Trade Organization, on which Britain will rely. In any bilateral bargaining with the US, the latter is going to impose very hard terms, the most distasteful of which are likely to relate to food standards and health. China is going to insist on the UK’s acceptance of its terms — as, by the way, is protectionist India. The old Commonwealth of Australia, Canada and New Zealand may be friendly, but these 65m people are neither here nor there for the UK, economically. In brief, outside the EU, the UK will not have greater control over its global environment. It will be on its own, and at the mercy of others, some far more potent than it is. Nor is this all. Trade agreements are increasingly about regulatory standards, because these are ever more important domestically in all significant countries. If the UK wishes to trade freely with the EU, it will have to adopt EU standards, as it has done as a member. But the same will apply to trade with other countries, notably in the case of the US. But what is to be done when, as over data protection or food, standards clash? This is not so important for manufacturing, which can produce to different standards. But it does matter for services, data handling and food, where how things are done is crucial. In the end, the UK will often have to align itself with the standards of one of the blocs — usually, I predict, the EU’s. There is something far bigger still. Since 2016, the challenges to liberal and democratic values have become far clearer. As Sigmar Gabriel, former German foreign minister, argues in a column for Project Syndicate, this is a dangerous and disheartening environment for the EU. But so, too, for the UK. Quite simply, the saga we are seeing unfold is a true tragedy. The UK has chosen a solitary path. But the EU should also reconsider. After all, as Mr Gabriel notes, even in Germany the view of immigration has changed somewhat. It is not too late to halt an act of such folly. The UK will not gain control in any important respect by leaving the EU. On the contrary, it is more likely to lose it. In this increasingly hostile world, we Europeans need to stick together. It is time for sensible people to try to think again. martin.wolf@ft.com
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 10:00:03 GMT
You do seem obsessed with it, and don't seem to understand taking back to control. With reference to that Brexitcentral link I posted, do you think the recent decade-high numbers of immigrants achieves the aim of taking back control of our borders in the way those Leavers who voted for a reduction in immigration would want? For all I know, you might be one. Enlighten me. Immigration doesn't interest me as much as you. I'm not obsessed by it. I think it should be controlled from the UK. Not by those outside the UK. That goes for all uk policies. I'm against illegal immigration.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 11:30:36 GMT
With reference to that Brexitcentral link I posted, do you think the recent decade-high numbers of immigrants achieves the aim of taking back control of our borders in the way those Leavers who voted for a reduction in immigration would want? For all I know, you might be one. Enlighten me. Immigration doesn't interest me as much as you. I'm not obsessed by it. I think it should be controlled from the UK. Not by those outside the UK. That goes for all uk policies. I'm against illegal immigration. That's great, John. I was just wondering about those Leave voters who did so because immigration was the most or second most significant reason for doing so and liked the idea of taking back control and reducing immigration. Given that it was such a priority for Leave voters, some kind of ongoing scrutiny over whether they feel that their wishes have been delivered seems perfectly reasonable rather than obsessive. After all, we should always hold our leader's promises up for analysis, don't you think? The fact that you're not one of those Leave voters is fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 11, 2020 13:44:42 GMT
I voted to stop uncontrolled immigration. But that is not the main reason (probably 5th actually), the main reason is in your post, namely "to take back control". Something the EU is still determined to prevent, it would appear from the reported progress on negotiations, where we expected to be subservient to countries like Canada and Japan in terms of agreement. The longer things go on, the more I am coming round to the dreadful view that we are better leaving without an agreement and take the pain. We would be in a much stronger position to negotiate, and the EU would be falling over themselves to avoid damaging their massive positive trade balance. An alternative view www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/473bd2ae-4ee5-11e9-b401-8d9ef1626294 Financial Times SIGN IN Brexit The Brexit delusion of taking back control The UK is a large minnow, but still a minnow, in a very big lake Sheep Wheel March 26, 2019 4:15 pm by Martin Wolf From Beijing, where I now am, the UK looks small. It also looks as if it has fallen into the hands of lunatics engaged in an astonishing act of national self-harm. But this, Brexiters will say, is an illusion. The UK is going to “take back control”. The slogan was brilliant. But it was the biggest delusion of all. Control is different from sovereignty. As I argued during the referendum campaign, the UK was already sovereign: it could, if it wished, vote to leave the EU. It did so, but promptly discovered that, while it was sovereign, it was not very powerful. Yet control is about power. In the post-referendum negotiations with the EU it has turned out, as informed people knew it would, that the EU was more powerful than the UK. This was so for a simple reason: it could impose far heavier penalties on the UK than the UK could on the EU. Britain sends 47 per cent of its exports of goods to the EU, while the rest of the EU sends 15 per cent of its exports to the UK. For the EU, the UK market is important. For the UK, the EU’s is vital. Welcome to the harsh world of international relations. We have been frequently reminded that the UK is the fifth (soon to be sixth) largest economy. That is true, but misleading. The world contains three economic superpowers: the US, the EU (without the UK) and China. These generated about 60 per cent of global output last year. The UK’s contribution was 3 per cent. It is large for a minnow, but still a minnow. So what might “control” mean for a small island country about to separate itself from its neighbours and closest economic partners? In some areas, it will be able to exercise control. But these are where it has always been able to do so. The UK’s net contribution to the EU was just 1.1 per cent of total public spending in the latest financial year. The EU has no significant influence over the UK’s spending on (or policies towards) health, education, housing, pensions, welfare, infrastructure, culture or, for that matter, defence and aid. In one rather intimate domestic area the UK does risk losing control: its own survival. The futures of Northern Ireland and Scotland within the UK have both been destabilised by Brexit. So where might Britain gain the control it now lacks? Obvious examples are those economic regulations that have fallen within the ambit of the EU’s competition policy, rules on state aid and the bloc’s single market. It is correct that if the UK left the EU completely, it could abandon an active competition policy and waste large amounts of money in propping up failed companies. Why it should view either as attractive is a mystery. The UK has largely unbridled control over its domestic affairs, for good or (too often) for ill. But it is an open, trading nation and, given its size and limited resources, has no future as anything else. It is a modest power in a big world: 2019 is not 1860. It depends on the behaviour of other sovereign countries. The EU has significantly increased the influence of Britain in a host of negotiations, notably over trade and climate. That will be gone. So, too, will influence over the EU’s policies towards the UK, as the withdrawal negotiations have already shown. But, we are told, the country can open up markets all over the world, to compensate for the loss of favourable access to the market of 450m people on its doorstep. Unfortunately, that would not be true even if the rest of the world were to be obliging, because the EU markets are so crucial for the UK. Moreover, the rest of the world is not going to be obliging. The US is in the process of demolishing the World Trade Organization, on which Britain will rely. In any bilateral bargaining with the US, the latter is going to impose very hard terms, the most distasteful of which are likely to relate to food standards and health. China is going to insist on the UK’s acceptance of its terms — as, by the way, is protectionist India. The old Commonwealth of Australia, Canada and New Zealand may be friendly, but these 65m people are neither here nor there for the UK, economically. In brief, outside the EU, the UK will not have greater control over its global environment. It will be on its own, and at the mercy of others, some far more potent than it is. Nor is this all. Trade agreements are increasingly about regulatory standards, because these are ever more important domestically in all significant countries. If the UK wishes to trade freely with the EU, it will have to adopt EU standards, as it has done as a member. But the same will apply to trade with other countries, notably in the case of the US. But what is to be done when, as over data protection or food, standards clash? This is not so important for manufacturing, which can produce to different standards. But it does matter for services, data handling and food, where how things are done is crucial. In the end, the UK will often have to align itself with the standards of one of the blocs — usually, I predict, the EU’s. There is something far bigger still. Since 2016, the challenges to liberal and democratic values have become far clearer. As Sigmar Gabriel, former German foreign minister, argues in a column for Project Syndicate, this is a dangerous and disheartening environment for the EU. But so, too, for the UK. Quite simply, the saga we are seeing unfold is a true tragedy. The UK has chosen a solitary path. But the EU should also reconsider. After all, as Mr Gabriel notes, even in Germany the view of immigration has changed somewhat. It is not too late to halt an act of such folly. The UK will not gain control in any important respect by leaving the EU. On the contrary, it is more likely to lose it. In this increasingly hostile world, we Europeans need to stick together. It is time for sensible people to try to think again. martin.wolf@ft.com The article is a point of view I strongly held for the first two decades of our membership, but progressively turned against. Why is it so called Europeans believe they need to stick together, talk about "little Britain" on it's own, and believe economies smaller than the UK like quote "Canada, Australia, and New Zealand" are quote "at the mercy of others"? Does Wolf believe we are going to lose our exports to the EU? The major EU economies largely buy their own products, generally being far more loyal and patriotic to their own commerce. They generally only buy British products they really want and need. I believe that will continue. As Wolf admits, attitudes are changing in the EU, immigration being just one. Southern states are kicking against the Euro, eastern states are kicking against central authoritarian control. Soon countries that have enjoy huge regional aid in the past like Spain and Ireland are going to find they are net financial contributers and EU membership will hit their pockets as regional aid and CAP money is reduced. The EU is playing hard ball with the UK because they know the EU will fall apart without Britain's membership. You cannot lightly dismiss a country of 66 million, with a modern economy that is the 6th biggest in the world. No longer 5th because we have been overtaken by India with a massive population and rapidly growing economy that will be crying out for the sort of products and services the UK can provide, (Believe me, not Wolf, I have worked in India for Tata.) Meanwhile apart from Germany the EU economy is largely stagnant with many states having massive unemployment, particularly among the young who need to travel to Germany, France, and Britain to get work. Ireland joined the EU because the UK joined. They have done exceedingly well out of it and are currently committed to remaining in (as would Scotland). But with the UK out, their main trading partners being the USA and UK, most of their exports to the EU travelling to Europe via the UK, and their net financial contribution increasing, the growth markets being outside the EU, I confidently predict it will not be many years before there will be a strong movement to leave.
|
|
|
Post by Timmypotter on Jun 11, 2020 13:44:52 GMT
Oh so when it's bad news it's Brexit When it's good news it's despite Brexit Nope, the Nissan article specifically dealt with requests for additional guarantees in the event of a no deal Brexit. Timmypotters article doesn't mention Brexit once. I just wondered what the reason for putting it on this thread was? People will attach their own narratives I guess. I put it on the thread because I knew someone would say "it doesn't mention Brexit in the article". This set me up for the tap-in that, of course, every article mentioned Brexit when Unilever were going to be leaving the UK. The shareholders told them where to stick it and they're the ones who count. The FTSE100 is still where the action is.
|
|
|
Post by Timmypotter on Jun 11, 2020 14:06:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 14:23:19 GMT
Immigration doesn't interest me as much as you. I'm not obsessed by it. I think it should be controlled from the UK. Not by those outside the UK. That goes for all uk policies. I'm against illegal immigration. That's great, John. I was just wondering about those Leave voters who did so because immigration was the most or second most significant reason for doing so and liked the idea of taking back control and reducing immigration. Given that it was such a priority for Leave voters, some kind of ongoing scrutiny over whether they feel that their wishes have been delivered seems perfectly reasonable rather than obsessive. After all, we should always hold our leader's promises up for analysis, don't you think? The fact that you're not one of those Leave voters is fair enough. I think that this man, in the video link below, got his priorities right about the EU. He actually sounds as though he believes what he says in the video, doesn't he, unlike the later model. No mention of immigration, your obsession with foreigners. You keep undermining your own arguments Red, on your eagerness to criticise Brexit.....I would not think any reasonable person would think it sensible, logical or reasonable to expect to see the effects of leaving the control of the bureaucracy for a good few years......but keep scraping the barrel....it might satisfy you to think that you've won the argument. Crack on. Jeremy Corbyn warned of 'European empire' and said EU treaty would create 'a military Frankenstein' | The Independent www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-brexit-eu-lisbon-treaty-europe-empire-military-video-a8766421.htmlI obviously hope and believe that the Irish people will vote no," he said. He was speaking shortly before Ireland's second referendum on the treaty. The first, in 2008, delivered a vote against it being adopted. Mr Corbyn also suggested the EU would make Irish voters "keep on voting until they get the result they want”. Ireland eventually voted to support the Lisbon Treaty, allowing its ratification by all EU member states.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 16:38:26 GMT
Nope, the Nissan article specifically dealt with requests for additional guarantees in the event of a no deal Brexit. Timmypotters article doesn't mention Brexit once. I just wondered what the reason for putting it on this thread was? People will attach their own narratives I guess. I put it on the thread because I knew someone would say "it doesn't mention Brexit in the article". This set me up for the tap-in that, of course, every article mentioned Brexit when Unilever were going to be leaving the UK. The shareholders told them where to stick it and they're the ones who count. The FTSE100 is still where the action is. I see, so your point was about inaccurate reporting? To want to stick an article which didn't mention Brexit on a Brexit thread to highlight biased reporting?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 11, 2020 16:39:55 GMT
That's great, John. I was just wondering about those Leave voters who did so because immigration was the most or second most significant reason for doing so and liked the idea of taking back control and reducing immigration. Given that it was such a priority for Leave voters, some kind of ongoing scrutiny over whether they feel that their wishes have been delivered seems perfectly reasonable rather than obsessive. After all, we should always hold our leader's promises up for analysis, don't you think? The fact that you're not one of those Leave voters is fair enough. I think that this man, in the video link below, got his priorities right about the EU. He actually sounds as though he believes what he says in the video, doesn't he, unlike the later model. No mention of immigration, your obsession with foreigners. You keep undermining your own arguments Red, on your eagerness to criticise Brexit.....I would not think any reasonable person would think it sensible, logical or reasonable to expect to see the effects of leaving the control of the bureaucracy for a good few years......but keep scraping the barrel....it might satisfy you to think that you've won the argument. Crack on. Jeremy Corbyn warned of 'European empire' and said EU treaty would create 'a military Frankenstein' | The Independent www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-brexit-eu-lisbon-treaty-europe-empire-military-video-a8766421.htmlI obviously hope and believe that the Irish people will vote no," he said. He was speaking shortly before Ireland's second referendum on the treaty. The first, in 2008, delivered a vote against it being adopted. Mr Corbyn also suggested the EU would make Irish voters "keep on voting until they get the result they want”. Ireland eventually voted to support the Lisbon Treaty, allowing its ratification by all EU member states. Thanks, John, always good to see what we've been promised and how it all pans out in relation to those promises, I agree.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 11, 2020 16:43:12 GMT
I think that this man, in the video link below, got his priorities right about the EU. He actually sounds as though he believes what he says in the video, doesn't he, unlike the later model. No mention of immigration, your obsession with foreigners. You keep undermining your own arguments Red, on your eagerness to criticise Brexit.....I would not think any reasonable person would think it sensible, logical or reasonable to expect to see the effects of leaving the control of the bureaucracy for a good few years......but keep scraping the barrel....it might satisfy you to think that you've won the argument. Crack on. Jeremy Corbyn warned of 'European empire' and said EU treaty would create 'a military Frankenstein' | The Independent www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-brexit-eu-lisbon-treaty-europe-empire-military-video-a8766421.htmlI obviously hope and believe that the Irish people will vote no," he said. He was speaking shortly before Ireland's second referendum on the treaty. The first, in 2008, delivered a vote against it being adopted. Mr Corbyn also suggested the EU would make Irish voters "keep on voting until they get the result they want”. Ireland eventually voted to support the Lisbon Treaty, allowing its ratification by all EU member states. Thanks, John, always good to see what we've been promised and how it all pans out in relation to those promises, I agree. Aye, it is difficult for some to come to terms with not getting what they want. 4 years after the referendum. Crack on.
|
|