More Brexit good news.......

[Tracker]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 11:09 AM

Germanophobia rules, KO? We must leave the EU for fear of Germany? Is that it? Is this the (mostly) unspoken fear that is driving Brexit?

 

Not for me, but we do need to be aware that Germany does like to be in charge and act accordingly.

 

Perhaps the only thing we did wrong was allow our 'friends' the US to give Germany a better deal for losing in 1945 than it did us, all the while making darned sure they made a good profit from Europe from the safety of the US.

Maybe if we had given up our overt world domination aspirations when Germany did and spent our taxes on bettering our own people rather than fighting wars in countries that were not a threat to us and trying to project a military presence beyond our budget things might have been different?

But then again given the socialist view that it is better to make the poor better off at the expense of the working man rather than make the working man's, remember him - he's the one who pays for it all, life and that of his family better, perhaps if they had more money the benefits cost would have been even higher.

That said I find it hard to think of any area or service that has improved in recent years?

[Brian Kirby]

Tracker - 2017-10-23 11:20 AM............................

1 Not for me, but we do need to be aware that Germany does like to be in charge and act accordingly.

2 Perhaps the only thing we did wrong was allow our 'friends' the US to give Germany a better deal for losing in 1945 than it did us, all the while making darned sure they made a good profit from Europe from the safety of the US.

3 Maybe if we had given up our overt world domination aspirations when Germany did and spent our taxes on bettering our own people rather than fighting wars in countries that were not a threat to us and trying to project a military presence beyond our budget things might have been different?

4 But then again given the socialist view that it is better to make the poor better off at the expense of the working man rather than make the working man's, remember him - he's the one who pays for it all, life and that of his family better, perhaps if they had more money the benefits cost would have been even higher.

5 That said I find it hard to think of any area or service that has improved in recent years?

1 But then, what country, through its political elite, doesn't like to "be in charge"? Germany is economically dominant in Europe, and pays the highest contributions to the EU, so will have inevitably greater influence than others. Question is, which is cause, and which is effect?

2 I think this was probably inevitable at the time. It was (and so far as I know still is) widely accepted that the main cause of the rise of Nazism in late 20s/early 30s Germany was the economic strain of war reparations imposed on Germany (at the insistance of France) post WW1. I think it was a fear of making the same mistake twice that drove the WW2 settlement. Britain was just too proud to admit it was, more or less, broke at the time, and took on commitments it couldn't afford!

3 Agreed. National pride trumped economic reality. Result not good!

4 Not sure I agree with that analysis of socialist motivation. I thought their idea was to soak the rich to pay the poor. The working man, as I understand him, is the middle income earner who picks up the bill left by the rich, because they shift their wealth into places the government can't reach, so those on PAYE become the easiest remaining target!. Last man standing? But, if you want to boost the economy, putting money into the pockets of the poor is more efficient than giving it to the rich (through tax reductions) because they go out and spend it - while the rich merely save it! :-)

[John52]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 11:01 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-10-22 9:42 PM

 

John52 - 2017-10-22 9:35 PM

 

Germany dominates the EU because it is the strongest economy. Something Britain once was, and still would be if it had been run differently. :-(

 

With Corbyn in charge? 8-) ............

 

(lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ......

It all about tenses, Dave. :-D "if it had been run differently" refers to the past. Britain was economically stronger than Germany, now Germany is stronger. The question you need to ask yourself is why? What did Germany do right, that we did wrong? Then ask whether that is the result of the EEC/EU (of which Germany is a committed member), or of successive British governments. You then have to ask how leaving the EU will actually change that, resulting in the UK overtaking Germany.

 

You put it better than I could Brian.

But I fear it still won't sink in :-S

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 11:01 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-10-22 9:42 PM

 

John52 - 2017-10-22 9:35 PM

 

Germany dominates the EU because it is the strongest economy. Something Britain once was, and still would be if it had been run differently. :-(

 

With Corbyn in charge? 8-) ............

 

(lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) (lol) ......

It all about tenses, Dave. :-D "if it had been run differently" refers to the past. Britain was economically stronger than Germany, now Germany is stronger. The question you need to ask yourself is why? What did Germany do right, that we did wrong? Then ask whether that is the result of the EEC/EU (of which Germany is a committed member), or of successive British governments. You then have to ask how leaving the EU will actually change that, resulting in the UK overtaking Germany.

 

So do you think Corbyn is the future? ;-) .........

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 12:05 PM

 

1 But then, what country, through its political elite, doesn't like to "be in charge"? Germany is economically dominant in Europe, and pays the highest contributions to the EU, so will have inevitably greater influence than others. Question is, which is cause, and which is effect?

/QUOTE]

 

Must be quite good for your countries bottom line if you don't need to maintain a military ;-) .........

 

Especially when you've discovered a different method to achieve the same agenda >:-) .......

 

 

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 11:09 AM

RogerC - 2017-10-22 9:06 PM.......................You remain lot are prepared to continue with the UK being under the yoke of the bureaucratic entity that is the EU leadership and you accuse me of wanting a totalitarian  regime?  You lot need to wake up and realise that the EU leadership is there to achieve what Germany couldn't in two world wars.....domination under the guise of a European Superstate through political and fiscal control because they found out that militarily they couldn't win.........................

Germanophobia rules, KO? We must leave the EU for fear of Germany? Is that it? Is this the (mostly) unspoken fear that is driving Brexit?

Germanophobia is rather strong.  Maybe my message didn't clarify my position.  Whichever country is in a position of fiscal and political power to the point where it becomes dominant in any organisation (EU/Soviet Union)and has a background of using military might in order to attempt to overrun a huge swathe of our globe not once but twice I consider to be a considerable threat.  

So, a 'phobia' with a rather 'lefty luvvy' name attached to it?  No.

Cautious of politicians from nations that have, in times past, committed untold, and some times unspeakable, acts in search of expansionism and domination?  Most certainly. 

Oh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back the stone ages please resist and accept that my reference is to recent/modern history as in WWl & WWll.

[pepe63xnotuse]

It wouldn't matter what the EU had/hadn't or will/won't ever achieve, it's clear that, for some, the fact that we were having to sit around a table(and not at the head of it!)with *Johnny Foreigner (*one of which "bombed our chippy", and the others,who would've "been speaking German it wasn't for us" etc etc *-) ) was always going to be the issue...

 

As I've said before, if the EU was "based" in the UK and seen to be "run by" the UK, in a way that some think that Germany supposedly run it, then I doubt many of the Brexiteers would have half the issues with it..

 

Altogether now...."Land..of..hope..and...glory.........(followed by)...Rule Britainnia....

 

(or for those more down market "Two world wars and one world cup..doo dah doo dah.."

[Brian Kirby]

pepe63 - 2017-10-23 1:56 PM

 

It wouldn't matter what the EU had/hadn't or will/won't ever achieve, it's clear that, for some, the fact that we were having to sit around a table(and not at the head of it!)with *Johnny Foreigner (*one of which "bombed our chippy", and the others,who would've "been speaking German it wasn't for us" etc etc *-) ) was always going to be the issue...

 

As I've said before, if the EU was "based" in the UK and seen to be "run by" the UK, in a way that some think that Germany supposedly run it, then I doubt many of the Brexiteers would have half the issues with it..

 

Altogether now...."Land..of..hope..and...glory.........(followed by)...Rule Britainnia....

 

(or for those more down market "Two world wars and one world cup..doo dah doo dah.."

Quite!! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PM

Cautious of politicians from nations that have, in times past, committed untold, and some times unspeakable, acts in search of expansionism and domination?

Do you realise that applies to Britain?

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-10-23 2:58 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PMCautious of politicians from nations that have, in times past, committed untold, and some times unspeakable, acts in search of expansionism and domination?

Do you realise that applies to Britain?

Clearly I do which is why I commented that it referred to recent history....specifically two world wars.  Your post just goes to show you either do not read , or do not understand the conditional comment I added at the end of the post.

So here it is again for your edification though I doubt you can resist another irrelevant reply as is your wont.

"Oh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back to the stone ages please resist and accept that my reference is to recent/modern history as in WWl & WWll".

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 10:53 AM

RogerC - 2017-10-22 9:35 PM......................1 All I would say is yes I, along with millions of others want to leave, we feel UK PLC will be better off outside of the clutches of the EU and that it deserves a chance to prove it.  2 We are looking to UK PLC being a success whereas you, of the remain camp, appear to have no faith whatsoever in UK PLC.  You appear to be constantly doing the UK down and there are those who are prepared to sacrifice our independence on the altar of a European ideal.  .................

1 To which I would reply that I, along with millions of others, do not share that dystopian view, and feel the UK will be better off within the EU.2 We look to the UK being a success within the EU, whereas you, of the leave camp, appear to have no faith whatsoever in the UK's ability to do this. You appear to be constantly doing the UK down with your belief that the EU bogey man, driven by a European ideal, will steal our independence from us.So, we disagree - but we already knew that. So what then?

Something of an 'at odds' post Brian.  

I consider it is the 'leave' camp that is of the opinion that UK PLC is more than capable of being a success outside of the EU.  Conversely it appears that the remain camp is afraid it can not and needs the 'crutch' of the EU in order to survive.  

The remain camp appears to be of the opinion that the EU shop door will be locked and the UK will not be allowed in to either purchase or sell goods.  It might take a bit of negotiation.....oh silly me that's what the talks are about isn't it.......and one way or another the door will have to be open so both parties can benefit. 

Regarding the issue of independence.  We have already conceded a number of powers to Brussels and, as you have clearly said previously, you are prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership.  So no I'm not concerned about the 'EU bogeyman' stealing our independence I am concerned about those with your outlook giving it away should we have voted remain. 

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 5:24 PM............................Something of an 'at odds' post Brian.  

1 I consider it is the 'leave' camp that is of the opinion that UK PLC is more than capable of being a success outside of the EU.

 

2 Conversely it appears that the remain camp is afraid it can not and needs the 'crutch' of the EU in order to survive.  

 

3 The remain camp appears to be of the opinion that the EU shop door will be locked and the UK will not be allowed in to either purchase or sell goods.  It might take a bit of negotiation.....oh silly me that's what the talks are about isn't it.......and one way or another the door will have to be open so both parties can benefit. 

 

4 Regarding the issue of independence.  We have already conceded a number of powers to Brussels and, as you have clearly said previously, you are prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership.  So no I'm not concerned about the 'EU bogeyman' stealing our independence I am concerned about those with your outlook giving it away should we have voted remain. 

1 Yes, it seems the leave camp do, generally, take that stance. But, in my opinion, greater success is more likely within the EU.

 

2 Not in my opinion. It is no crutch, it is a competitive market. Its great advantage is free access. Given that advantage, I think it offers reasonable certainty while we work out why we rank behind almost every EU member for productivity, and consistently import more than we export. I think first fix those, entirely home grown, problems, before setting out to take on the world. If we don't, you can forget success in any market. If we do, we can succeed in any market.

 

3 Others may, but I don't. What I do think is that the Brexit camp delude themselves in their belief that the EU will bend to our will in order to maintain access to the UK market. We import from 27 other countries, not from the EU. In the case of any individual our share of their total exports is useful, but is not so great as to merit access to their market on our terms. Across the 27 as a whole, this is merely amplified. WTO tariffs would mean we all sell less, but not that we, or they, would sell nothing.

 

4 No Roger I have not said, clearly or otherwise, that I am "prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership". What I have said is that I am relaxed about pooling sovereignty for our mutual good. This is just another of your straw man arguments.

 

I do not see the other 27 countries, collectively or individually, as a threat to the UK. I don't necessarily agree with them all/all of the time but, as I have said before, I think they are equally as dedicated to preserving their national characteristics as we are to preserving ours, and I therefore think this spectre of the rapacious European super state no more than an irrational nightmare shared by (or sold to, to frighten them) Brexiters.

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2017-10-23 1:08 PM...............................So do you think Corbyn is the future? ;-) .........

No Dave, any more than I think you are! :-D

[antony1969]

No way I simply can't believe it ... http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/869641/BBC-News-24-Brexit-bias-report-by-News-watch-found-leave-vote-bigger-if-remainers-off-air

[Violet1956]

antony1969 - 2017-10-23 7:46 PM

 

No way I simply can't believe it ... http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/869641/BBC-News-24-Brexit-bias-report-by-News-watch-found-leave-vote-bigger-if-remainers-off-air

 

Do you ever stop to think why it suits the mandarins that own the popular press to attack the BBC?-a publicly funded institution that does not rely on advertising for revenue and one that is not vulnerable to outside influence from the wealthiest people and organisations on the earth.

 

And do you really think that the multi-millionaire owners of the Express and the DM do not serve their own ends when commenting on the big political issues of the day? If you don’t then you are seriously naïve.

 

Veronica

[antony1969]

Violet1956 - 2017-10-23 8:25 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-23 7:46 PM

 

No way I simply can't believe it ... http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/869641/BBC-News-24-Brexit-bias-report-by-News-watch-found-leave-vote-bigger-if-remainers-off-air

 

Do you ever stop to think why it suits the mandarins that own the popular press to attack the BBC?-a publicly funded institution that does not rely on advertising for revenue and one that is not vulnerable to outside influence from the wealthiest people and organisations on the earth.

 

And do you really think that the multi-millionaire owners of the Express and the DM do not serve their own ends when commenting on the big political issues of the day? If you don’t then you are seriously naïve.

 

Veronica

 

I don't pay for the DM or Express through a licence ... If I did I would expect them to stay neutral like the Beeb should ... Is that naive Veronica

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-10-23 8:25 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-23 7:46 PM

 

No way I simply can't believe it ... http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/869641/BBC-News-24-Brexit-bias-report-by-News-watch-found-leave-vote-bigger-if-remainers-off-air

 

Do you ever stop to think why it suits the mandarins that own the popular press to attack the BBC?-a publicly funded institution that does not rely on advertising for revenue and one that is not vulnerable to outside influence from the wealthiest people and organisations on the earth.

 

And do you really think that the multi-millionaire owners of the Express and the DM do not serve their own ends when commenting on the big political issues of the day? If you don’t then you are seriously naïve.

 

Veronica

 

The only folk who are seriously naive are those who think the BBC is neutral *-) ........

 

 

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 6:19 PM   4 No Roger I have not said, clearly or otherwise, that I am "prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership". What I have said is that I am relaxed about pooling sovereignty for our mutual good. This is just another of your straw man arguments.

Albeit under another thread you did write:

"If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it".

Forfeit, surrender, pooling (although how one can pool Sovereignty escapes me just now) it all boils down to the same thing in my book: EU encroachment on, and a diminishing of the powers and independence of self determination by a Sovereign power.

Any further diminishing of National Sovereignty/self determination etc is not a price I would be prepared to pay regardless of what it buys us. Clearly you are although you now appear to deny having said as much.

[antony1969]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 9:41 PM

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 6:19 PM   4 No Roger I have not said, clearly or otherwise, that I am "prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership". What I have said is that I am relaxed about pooling sovereignty for our mutual good. This is just another of your straw man arguments.

Albeit under another thread you did write:

"If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it".

Forfeit, surrender, pooling (although how one can pool Sovereignty escapes me just now) it all boils down to the same thing in my book: EU encroachment on, and a diminishing of the powers and independence of self determination by a Sovereign power.

Any further diminishing of National Sovereignty/self determination etc is not a price I would be prepared to pay regardless of what it buys us. Clearly you are although you now appear to deny having said as much.

Wonder how much "forfeiting a bit more national independence" is acceptable to Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months as opinions change and opinions over how big a "bit" is differs too I'm sure ... I gotta feeling Brians bit is much bigger than mine 8-)

[John52]

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM

Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months

 

Can you quote the post where he said that *-)

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-10-24 8:52 AM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM

Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months

 

Can you quote the post where he said that *-)

 

Take a look back yourself or maybe better just ask Brian

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 9:41 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 6:19 PM   4 No Roger I have not said, clearly or otherwise, that I am "prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership". What I have said is that I am relaxed about pooling sovereignty for our mutual good. This is just another of your straw man arguments.

Albeit under another thread you did write: If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it". Forfeit, surrender, pooling (although how one can pool Sovereignty escapes me just now) it all boils down to the same thing in my book: EU encroachment on, and a diminishing of the powers and independence of self determination by a Sovereign power. Any further diminishing of National Sovereignty/self determination etc is not a price I would be prepared to pay regardless of what it buys us. Clearly you are although you now appear to deny having said as much.

Not another straw man! The full quote is: "If it's better for us to be in, in terms of rising living standards and long term growth and stability, then in is where we should be. If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it." So, in short, give a bit to gain a bit. So, no, I did not "say as much", as your selective snip might infer. As ever, you omit context to distort the point, with which distortion you then proceed to argue, and end up merely arguing with yourself. If you wish to do that I have no objection - just, please, don't bring me into it! :-D

 

Pooled sovereignty? This is from the OUP online dictionary:

 

"A term used to denote the sharing of decision-making powers between states in systems of international cooperation. Whereas unanimous decision-making between states leaves sovereignty unscathed, given the right of any state to unilaterally veto decisions, pooling of sovereignty implies a departure from unanimous decision-making. The most prominent system of international cooperation in which sovereignty is pooled is the European Union (EU). In a number of issue areas which have been defined in the treaty and subsequent treaty amendments, the member state delegates in the Council, one of the EU's legislative organs, decide by a qualified majority. Consequently, pooling creates the possibility that individual member states can be outvoted. The main reason why states choose to pool sovereignty is to reduce the likelihood of gridlock in policy areas where—on average—states expect to be better off by pooling sovereignty than by retaining the unanimity rule. This has been the case particularly in the context of creating a European single market for goods and services. The introduction of qualified majority voting in these issues demonstrated that EU member states valued the benefits of the abolition of trade barriers more than those that would have been associated with retaining the right to veto. However, in policy areas which governments consider particularly sensitive for domestic or ideological reasons or where the potential gains from pooling sovereignty are uncertain, governments are likely to retain the right to veto (for example, foreign and security policy, and redistributive policies)."

 

That coincides with my understanding of the concept. But, I can see why you might struggle with it.

[Brian Kirby]

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM.........................Wonder how much "forfeiting a bit more national independence" is acceptable to Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months as opinions change and opinions over how big a "bit" is differs too I'm sure ... I gotta feeling Brians bit is much bigger than mine 8-)

See my post below above in response to Roger, Antony.

 

You seem to have skimmed my earlier post on referendums, but hot to have read it. There is no mention of 16 months, only of the flawed logic of referendums as a way to determine government policy on the basis of public opinion.

 

However, I guess the bit of national independence I'd forfeit in exchange for advantage elsewhere would be bigger than yours, because you'd be so focused on the loss, you'd lose sight of any conceivable advantage! :-D

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 5:12 PM

John52 - 2017-10-23 2:58 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PMCautious of politicians from nations that have, in times past, committed untold, and some times unspeakable, acts in search of expansionism and domination?

Do you realise that applies to Britain?

Clearly I do which is why I commented that it referred to recent history....specifically two world wars.  Your post just goes to show you either do not read , or do not understand the conditional comment I added at the end of the post.

So here it is again for your edification though I doubt you can resist another irrelevant reply as is your wont.

"Oh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back to the stone ages please resist and accept that my reference is to recent/modern history as in WWl & WWll".

Another Straw Man. Nobody was going back to the Stone Ages. You are just selecting a time period that suits your prejudices (WW1 & 2 - both of which where war was declared by Britain by the way) and ignoring what went before and after (eg Suez)None of those running Germany now had the slightest involvement in what you are holding against them. And despite runing a far more Democratic and Egalitarian country than Britain they would punish anyone for wearing Nazi Regalia like the German immigrants in Britain's Unelected Head of State and Hangers On - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1481148/Prince-Harry-faces-outcry-at-Nazi-outfit.html

[antony1969]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 1:34 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM.........................Wonder how much "forfeiting a bit more national independence" is acceptable to Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months as opinions change and opinions over how big a "bit" is differs too I'm sure ... I gotta feeling Brians bit is much bigger than mine 8-)

See my post below above in response to Roger, Antony.

 

You seem to have skimmed my earlier post on referendums, but hot to have read it. There is no mention of 16 months, only of the flawed logic of referendums as a way to determine government policy on the basis of public opinion.

 

However, I guess the bit of national independence I'd forfeit in exchange for advantage elsewhere would be bigger than yours, because you'd be so focused on the loss, you'd lose sight of any conceivable advantage! :-D

 

My apologies ... A quick look on the other 9 page EU thread has you down as agreeing to referendums every 2 years not 16 months as I earlier said ... What's 6 months between friends ... Regarding the size of the bit you've not said how big that bit might be but by your answer I guess it could well grow into a humongous chunk