When will we see the benefits?

[Barryd999]

Short memories huh?

 

I prefer "Shaking Point". 8-)

 

[Brian Kirby]

Birdbrain - 2020-07-06 7:43 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-06 6:56 PM

747 - 2020-07-06 12:34 PM...……………………….So the EU is looking after its member States ..... absolutely hilarious. In the 2008/9 economic downturn they did nothing ... until it looked like the Euro would collapse, along with the EU. Southern European countries were bankrupted while Northern ones protected themselves. The Covid epidemic was past its peak when they reluctantly offered some financial aid. It is a club with first and second class members, we are in the second group.

I think this misrepresents what the EU can do/could have done. The EU has no funding stream for such interventions. It requires unanimity of all member states to change its budget.

 

Those countries in trouble in 2010 were suffering from their own economic mismanagement (plus in several cases - most notably Greece - their cheating in order to qualify for Euro membership) and the other member states were uninclined to underwrite their profligacy.

 

Economic measures were eventually agreed, but not as a direct result of the 2008 crash. That merely exposed those who'd been skinny dipping, to quote Warren Buffet's popular phrase of the time.

 

The EU had no role in their predicaments, that had brought that on themselves. The real reason for the bail-outs was to protect the Euro from the impact of a number of countries re-introducing their old currencies in order to devalue. The bail-outs were judged a less damaging option.

 

Are you saying Greece and "other member states" conned the EU ??? ... No way that cant be right

Yes, as was widely reported at the time, various countries, most notably Greece, "cooked their books" by concealing substantial debts with the aid of various financial institutions - that most referenced at the time being Goldman Sachs. It was also suggested that the EU were aware this was happening, but were more anxious to ensure that the maximum number of member states joined the €, to give it weight on international markets as a disincentive to speculation. As a new currency, it needed to have, and maintain, "critical mass" in the interests of value stability. It seems to have been a case of "needs must when the devil drives". To that extent, it worked.

[Brian Kirby]

jumpstart - 2020-07-06 5:30 PM

pepe63 - 2020-07-06 11:54 AM

Whilst those who voted to leave would have done so for a number of reasons, please lets not pretend that the "main" reason that Mr/Mrs Average Brexiteer- in- the- street voted as he/she did , was anything to do with "trade deals", and who we were/weren't able to have them with.... *-)

 

No, it was clear from the subject matter in the main media, and the "talk" on social media (very much including this forum) that at the time it wasn't about the above, it was about all those funny "Johnnie Foreigner" types who were supposedly "..comin' ova 'ere..takin' our jobs..cloggin' up our NHS..and scroungin' our benefits.." etc etc.

 

Also for some, the fact that we (the UK) were having to sit around a table with the aforementioned Johnnie Foreigners' representatives, instead of at the head of it, was never ever going to sit well... :-S

 

I know it’s fashionable to say that was all about “foreigners” but funnily enough trade and how the EU fails it’s citizens was what people voted on.

What aspects of "trade" prompted voters to vote leave? What trade, with whom?

How has the EU failed it's citizens to the extent that people voted leave on that basis?

[Guest pelmetman]

Oi Losers.......... if your not happy :D ..........

 

There's still time to migrate to the EU ;-) .........

 

http://daystobrexit.co.uk/

 

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

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

StuartO - 2020-07-05 7:27 AM

Barryd999 - 2020-07-04 10:41 PM .... Just about every economist reckons the costs of leaving the EU will far outweigh the tiny amount we currently pay in. .....

When people say things like that they deprive themselves of any credibility in the argument they are putting forward.

What evidence can you possibly have for such a fanciful claim? How can you possibly know what "just about every economist" reckons?

If you want to convince people who are not already on your bandwagon, you will have to do a lot better than spout nonesense like that.

One has to apply a little common sense in reading posts. I assume you would accept that it might be somewhat perverse to interpret Barry's point as including every economist in the world, and that a more reasonable interpretation would be to limit those intended to be included to those economists who had actually expressed an opinion on the probable economic impacts of Brexit?

 

Then the answer to your question is that we know this because the relevant economists were polled around the time of the referendum, and the clear majority (from memory 80% or so) were of that view. I assume those polls still exist, so can be consulted by anyone so inclined.

[Nicepix]

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 9:53 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-06 9:04 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-06 6:46 PM

 

jumpstart - 2020-07-06 5:30 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-06 11:54 AM

 

Whilst those who voted to leave would have done so for a number of reasons, please lets not pretend that the "main" reason that Mr/Mrs Average Brexiteer- in- the- street voted as he/she did , was anything to do with "trade deals", and who we were/weren't able to have them with.... *-)

 

No, it was clear from the subject matter in the main media, and the "talk" on social media (very much including this forum) that at the time it wasn't about the above, it was about all those funny "Johnnie Foreigner" types who were supposedly "..comin' ova 'ere..takin' our jobs..cloggin' up our NHS..and scroungin' our benefits.." etc etc.

 

Also for some, the fact that we (the UK) were having to sit around a table with the aforementioned Johnnie Foreigners' representatives, instead of at the head of it, was never ever going to sit well...

 

:-S

 

I know it’s fashionable to say that was all about “foreigners” but funnily enough trade and how the EU fails it’s citizens was what people voted on.

 

That might have been your reasons but it certainly wasnt the reasons most people voted for Brexit.

 

)

 

You never learn do you? How on earth have you got the detailed information to evidence that claim?

 

No wonder nobody takes you seriously.

 

(lol) Seriously? Have you been on a desert island for four years or something? You really would have had to either been cut off from the rest of the world or been walking around with your head up your arse not to believe that immigration was the single biggest reason people voted for Brexit. All the polling leading up to the Brexit vote showed this. Of course after the vote was won as if by magic those that cited immigration as their main reason for voting to leave the EU suddenly decided it was not their main concern after all and the figures citing Immigration as a main concern dropped dramatically. Odd huh? *-)

 

Breaking point anyone?

 

You cannot say with any authority that most people who voted for Brexit did so because of any one reason. If you can then prove it by showing us where the information concerning every voter's reasons can be found. It is pure snobbery put about by people who simply cannot accept democracy. My wife's ex-boss runs 7 veterinary surgeries, no mug, and he voted Leave because the EU is strangling his business with all its unnecessary regulations designed merely to keep the EU's economies ticking along.

 

Both sides are as guilty as each other of being mis-informed. I can point to friends and customers who voted Remain simply down to personal circumstances; one for example points to EU funding at the university where his wife works. He doesn't know for sure whether the UK Government would take up the funding, but he voted Remain because he wasn't sure. Another couple who require expensive medication that is currently provided by the mutual agreements voted Remain because they weren't sure whether they would have to pay for it in future. I'll wager that hundreds of thousands in each camp voted the same way; for personal, not national interests. There is a political saying that to overcome the inertia of not changing you need a lot of votes. The 52:48 split doesn't represent truly the country's feelings.

 

Of those Remain supporters I have spoken to at length about this issue not one knew of the EU's manifesto. Not one had heard of the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction' that lays a clear path to an EU army, EU border guards, further integration of politics and financial controls including the appointment of an EU Head of Finance who could over rule member state's budgets or spending plans. Not one knew that the EU absorbed 80% of all import duties on goods coming in from outside the EU. Not one knew the EU creamed off some of the VAT everybody pays. Three Visions, One Direction is an Orwelian document put together by the EU's press office is the fruit of Merkel, Macron and Junckers who are all arch-Fedralists. In fact you will find it difficult to find anyone who is not hell bent on Federalism and "More Europe". in the EU heirachy That is one of the big problems with the EU; there is no balance. So Europe is sleepwalking into a nightmare scenario akin to the USSR.

 

Brexit might seem to be a big leap in the dark. A bit like jumping off a moving train. But when you know where that train is heading, the risk of jumping into the unknown is better than arriving meekly at the known.

 

[Brian Kirby]

Nicepix - 2020-07-05 8:03 AM

StuartO - 2020-07-05 8:27 AM

Barryd999 - 2020-07-04 10:41 PM .... Just about every economist reckons the costs of leaving the EU will far outweigh the tiny amount we currently pay in. .....

 

When people say things like that they deprive themselves of any credibility in the argument they are putting forward.

 

What evidence can you possibly have for such a fanciful claim? How can you possibly know what "just about every economist" reckons?

 

If you want to convince people who are not already on your bandwagon, you will have to do a lot better than spout nonesense like that.

 

1 Exactly. And the economists who predicted doom and gloom the moment a Leave vote was announced? *-)

 

2 The fishing industry has declined primarily due to increased competition as a result of sharing UK fisheries with competitors. As I have already posted the UK fishermen will still be able to sell fish to Europe because all the refrigerated lorries bringing farm fresh food from the continent need a return load or the French and Spanish farmers and hauliers will be out of business. Fishing will grow as an employment and in these times of computerisation and mechanisation putting people out of work any increase in jobs is a good thing.

 

3 So when the Express publish scare stories about French trawlers barricading British ports just remember that they would be preventing French and Spanish perishable cargoes from being landed promptly.

1 Those economists do not, actually, exist. The quote was attributed to Osborne (who has a 2:1 Oxford degree in modern history, and not even a PPE). Osborne was making a political, not an economic, point, in attempting to scare people in to voting remain. The bit that got left out was the underlying assumption of the forecasts was that if we voted to leave we would leave, not that we would delay leaving for 4 years. An economist might have been more cautious in what he said. There were however immediate consequences, as can be seen in the post referendum fall in the value of the £ (about €1.35 to £1.00 pre referendum to an immediate post referendum €1.20 to £1.00, and then fluctuating down to its present level around €1.10 to £1.00). Events since the referendum have borne out the generality of the forecasts, but have been spread hitherto over those 4 years of uncertainty, with various firms shifting their HQs and/or manufacturing plants elsewhere. Actions have consequences.

 

2 Not sure the decline is primarily due to the reason you quote. What has actually prevented the UK fishing industry from being able to compete with the Spanish and French industries? How is that failure to compete due to the actions or inactions of the EU, as opposed to the actions and inactions of the UK industry or the UK government? It is a rather bold assumption that UK fish will be sold into the European market in future - we do not know how that is to be provided for in whatever trade agreement emerges from the transition negotiations. And if we leave with no agreement?

[Barryd999]

Nicepix - 2020-07-07 11:54 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 9:53 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-06 9:04 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-06 6:46 PM

 

jumpstart - 2020-07-06 5:30 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-06 11:54 AM

 

Whilst those who voted to leave would have done so for a number of reasons, please lets not pretend that the "main" reason that Mr/Mrs Average Brexiteer- in- the- street voted as he/she did , was anything to do with "trade deals", and who we were/weren't able to have them with.... *-)

 

No, it was clear from the subject matter in the main media, and the "talk" on social media (very much including this forum) that at the time it wasn't about the above, it was about all those funny "Johnnie Foreigner" types who were supposedly "..comin' ova 'ere..takin' our jobs..cloggin' up our NHS..and scroungin' our benefits.." etc etc.

 

Also for some, the fact that we (the UK) were having to sit around a table with the aforementioned Johnnie Foreigners' representatives, instead of at the head of it, was never ever going to sit well...

 

:-S

 

I know it’s fashionable to say that was all about “foreigners” but funnily enough trade and how the EU fails it’s citizens was what people voted on.

 

That might have been your reasons but it certainly wasnt the reasons most people voted for Brexit.

 

)

 

You never learn do you? How on earth have you got the detailed information to evidence that claim?

 

No wonder nobody takes you seriously.

 

(lol) Seriously? Have you been on a desert island for four years or something? You really would have had to either been cut off from the rest of the world or been walking around with your head up your arse not to believe that immigration was the single biggest reason people voted for Brexit. All the polling leading up to the Brexit vote showed this. Of course after the vote was won as if by magic those that cited immigration as their main reason for voting to leave the EU suddenly decided it was not their main concern after all and the figures citing Immigration as a main concern dropped dramatically. Odd huh? *-)

 

Breaking point anyone?

 

You cannot say with any authority that most people who voted for Brexit did so because of any one reason. If you can then prove it by showing us where the information concerning every voter's reasons can be found. It is pure snobbery put about by people who simply cannot accept democracy. My wife's ex-boss runs 7 veterinary surgeries, no mug, and he voted Leave because the EU is strangling his business with all its unnecessary regulations designed merely to keep the EU's economies ticking along.

 

Both sides are as guilty as each other of being mis-informed. I can point to friends and customers who voted Remain simply down to personal circumstances; one for example points to EU funding at the university where his wife works. He doesn't know for sure whether the UK Government would take up the funding, but he voted Remain because he wasn't sure. Another couple who require expensive medication that is currently provided by the mutual agreements voted Remain because they weren't sure whether they would have to pay for it in future. I'll wager that hundreds of thousands in each camp voted the same way; for personal, not national interests. There is a political saying that to overcome the inertia of not changing you need a lot of votes. The 52:48 split doesn't represent truly the country's feelings.

 

Of those Remain supporters I have spoken to at length about this issue not one knew of the EU's manifesto. Not one had heard of the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction' that lays a clear path to an EU army, EU border guards, further integration of politics and financial controls including the appointment of an EU Head of Finance who could over rule member state's budgets or spending plans. Not one knew that the EU absorbed 80% of all import duties on goods coming in from outside the EU. Not one knew the EU creamed off some of the VAT everybody pays. Three Visions, One Direction is an Orwelian document put together by the EU's press office is the fruit of Merkel, Macron and Junckers who are all arch-Fedralists. In fact you will find it difficult to find anyone who is not hell bent on Federalism and "More Europe". in the EU heirachy That is one of the big problems with the EU; there is no balance. So Europe is sleepwalking into a nightmare scenario akin to the USSR.

 

Brexit might seem to be a big leap in the dark. A bit like jumping off a moving train. But when you know where that train is heading, the risk of jumping into the unknown is better than arriving meekly at the known.

 

Go and do some research yourself. Look at the polls for around early 2016. By a country mile you will see the majority cited Immigration as a key reason for voting to leave the EU. Well that and lots of stupid EU laws that when pressed nobody could ever think of any apart from the made up one about Bananas.

 

I am sure you can show a few personal examples of clever people who voted to leave or remainers that had a vested interest in remaining. So what? It proves nothing. Over thirty million people voted. 99% of them probably didnt understand the stuff you just googled about the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction'. The most popular search in the UK on google the day after the referendum was "what is the EU?".

 

The UK had the best deal out of all the countries within the EU with more opt outs including opt outs from further federalisation than any other member. EU Army? So what? Why would that be such a bad thing and even if it ever did happen which is unlikely why would we not want to be part of it and if we didnt we can just veto it or not participate. We kind of have joint military operations already anyway. The fear of an EU army by Brexiteers is just typical of their distrust of Johnny Foreigner. Like somehow we are just better than they are or the thought of our brave soldiers being ordered about by some Frenchman is just too much to bear for some of them. Anyway its irrelevant as Brexit was won on a s**t load of lies and plane old racism. Democracy? Dont make me laugh. Our Democracy died in 2016.

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Nicepix - 2020-07-05 4:13 PM

1 First the £10 for £1 issue. The headline says: ..."It’s an estimate based on a study, not solid fact,".... Not solid fact. We have already seen how accurate these forecasts are (not.)

 

2 Second the trade deficit: "The UK had an overall trade deficit of -£72 billion with the EU in 2019. A surplus of £23 billion on trade in services was outweighed by a deficit of -£95 billion on trade in goods. The UK had a trade surplus of £46 billion with non-EU countries. ..." So £95 billion is a small amount is it?

 

3 Third: Freedom of Movement. Are you aware that EU countries also have a shortage of low skilled labour and farmers in Germany cannot recruit enough farm labourers? So Freedom of Movement isn't solving that issue even before COVID.

"Source: Xinhua 2018-05-23 02:50:26……………………………....

1 That is normal, it is a forecast - a working assumption based on extrapolation from present data. That should not invalidate it, as you appear to be doing. If the forecast is a 10 - 1 advantage, and you consider that OTT, on what basis do you reject the 10 - 1 advantage, what figure would you substitute, and why? Better reasoned discussion than whack-a-mole?

 

2 That we have a trade surplus with non EU countries doesn't dictate that it is sensible to forego EU trade because we have a deficit with them. Surely that tells us that we need to address the reasons for that EU deficit in the reasonable expectation that in so doing we should also increase our non-EU world trade? It just seems defeatist to walk away from trade with countries with whom we have trade deficits - especially when they are the nearest and cheapest countries to which we can export. Not much of a model for a foreign trade policy, surely?

 

3 Since before the referendum, and before we actually left the EU in January this year, we have had approximately 1.3 million non EU workers in the UK against approximately 2.3 million from within the EU. The figures for both seem not to have varied by much over the past 5 years. So, even while members of the EU we could, and did, employ non-EUforeign workers. Leaving won't alter that. So the advantage of leaving is what?

 

The whole point of the EEC/EU has been to make European states wealthy. That the Germans can't now get cheap labour from within the EU points to the gradual success of that policy. As the poorer countries get richer, the numbers of people to willing to travel for low paid jobs falls. With their growing wealth their purchasing power grows, and they consume more, and so on. That is to the potential advantage of all member states. That is the objective, and that German labour shortage points to its success.

 

So, either the cost of agricultural products must rise to levels that attract indigenous labour, or non-EU labour should be employed as proposed, or the productivity of German agriculture needs to rise to reduce the overall demand for such labour - or some combination of all three. That is success, not failure.

 

Ultimately, trying to run our industry on the basis of importing cheap goods (and so prevention those goods being produced at home) or on importing cheap labour (and so preventing the employment of our own) will prove self-defeating. Out history is trying to tell us that, but we prefer to stick to cheap and any (future) price. That, very neatly, takes us back to the state pre- EEC Britain was in. Our fundamentals haven't changed in 40 years. We joined the EEC to try to fix them, and were leaving it for the same reason with the fundamentals still unfixed. Th EU simply became the excuse for continuing to ignore them. It didn't work in 1973, and it won't work now. Brexit is a diversion, not a cure.

[pepe63xnotuse]

Just Google these two phrases in turn (without the quotation marks) and then click "images" ;-)

 

"pre-referendum trade deal Headlines"

 

"pre-referendum immigration Headlines"

 

...and once you've seen what they bring up, then ask yourselves whether or not "immigration" was a (the?) major issue for the Brexit project?

 

..and it is somewhat farcical, that on this thread alone, we have some who having voted for the UK to leave the EU, they themselves choose to spend at least 6 months a year living/holidying within the EU, and another who has chosen to actually live within it !?

 

If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

 

:-S

[Brian Kirby]

pepe63 - 2020-07-07 2:02 PM...………………..If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

:-S

And why would the other 27 member states all wish to remain a part of it - unless of course, the Brexiters think the other 27 states are also "that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt", in which case they at least show consistent prejudice! :-D

[Bulletguy]

pepe63 - 2020-07-07 2:02 PM

 

Just Google these two phrases in turn (without the quotation marks) and then click "images" ;-)

 

"pre-referendum trade deal Headlines"

 

"pre-referendum immigration Headlines"

 

...and once you've seen what they bring up, then ask yourselves whether or not "immigration" was a (the?) major issue for the Brexit project?

 

..and it is somewhat farcical, that on this thread alone, we have some who having voted for the UK to leave the EU, they themselves choose to spend at least 6 months a year living/holidying within the EU, and another who has chosen to actually live within it !?

Quite right and their rank hypocrisy is staggering. There are a number of clips on YouTube about 'expat' Brits (they don't like being called immigrants!) displaying their arrogance, "we are not foreigners, we are British" and "we should keep our own FoM" etc. Liverpool guy Derry Barton on this clip moved to Spain because "being in the EU will benefit me and my family". He voted Brexit.

 

If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

 

:-S

Good question Pepe though don't expect an honest answer! Just the usual excuses and waffle.

 

[Barryd999]

pepe63 - 2020-07-07 2:02 PM

 

Just Google these two phrases in turn (without the quotation marks) and then click "images" ;-)

 

"pre-referendum trade deal Headlines"

 

"pre-referendum immigration Headlines"

 

...and once you've seen what they bring up, then ask yourselves whether or not "immigration" was a (the?) major issue for the Brexit project?

 

..and it is somewhat farcical, that on this thread alone, we have some who having voted for the UK to leave the EU, they themselves choose to spend at least 6 months a year living/holidying within the EU, and another who has chosen to actually live within it !?

 

If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

 

:-S

 

Wow! the results are pretty staggering. When you cast your mind back to June 2016 there was a massive change of tack as soon as the result came out. Up until then it was all about Immigration but pretty much straight away it was never all about immigration. Of course post referendum it was probably a lot harder to get someone to admit that their main reason for voting leave was immigration but lets face it, it probably was.

 

BBC article from back then fact checks some of it. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36641390

 

They are doing the same now. The Leave Alliance has now deleted all its tweets from before the 30th of June where Brexiteers were banging on about no deal and now they are making out they always wanted a deal and its the fault of remainers that we wont get one. (lol) These people are a joke.

[teflon2]

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-07 11:37 AM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-07-06 7:43 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-06 6:56 PM

747 - 2020-07-06 12:34 PM...……………………….So the EU is looking after its member States ..... absolutely hilarious. In the 2008/9 economic downturn they did nothing ... until it looked like the Euro would collapse, along with the EU. Southern European countries were bankrupted while Northern ones protected themselves. The Covid epidemic was past its peak when they reluctantly offered some financial aid. It is a club with first and second class members, we are in the second group.

I think this misrepresents what the EU can do/could have done. The EU has no funding stream for such interventions. It requires unanimity of all member states to change its budget.

 

Those countries in trouble in 2010 were suffering from their own economic mismanagement (plus in several cases - most notably Greece - their cheating in order to qualify for Euro membership) and the other member states were uninclined to underwrite their profligacy.

 

Economic measures were eventually agreed, but not as a direct result of the 2008 crash. That merely exposed those who'd been skinny dipping, to quote Warren Buffet's popular phrase of the time.

 

The EU had no role in their predicaments, that had brought that on themselves. The real reason for the bail-outs was to protect the Euro from the impact of a number of countries re-introducing their old currencies in order to devalue. The bail-outs were judged a less damaging option.

 

Are you saying Greece and "other member states" conned the EU ??? ... No way that cant be right

Yes, as was widely reported at the time, various countries, most notably Greece, "cooked their books" by concealing substantial debts with the aid of various financial institutions - that most referenced at the time being Goldman Sachs. It was also suggested that the EU were aware this was happening, but were more anxious to ensure that the maximum number of member states joined the €, to give it weight on international markets as a disincentive to speculation. As a new currency, it needed to have, and maintain, "critical mass" in the interests of value stability. It seems to have been a case of "needs must when the devil drives". To that extent, it worked.

 

 

So you seem to accept that lies, cheating deceit and fraud is OK when it's expedient. No wonder you wanted to remain in the EU as they are past masters at it. (!)

[Nicepix]

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-07 5:01 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-07 2:02 PM...………………..If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

:-S

And why would the other 27 member states all wish to remain a part of it - unless of course, the Brexiters think the other 27 states are also "that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt", in which case they at least show consistent prejudice! :-D

 

Being in the EU suits some member countries; Germany for one. Others are wooed by the financial incentives and don't mind for the moment having their buying habits manipulated as long as the cash keeps flowing in. That is what the EU has become; a money go round. The UK had the worst deal. Italy and Greece will pull the plug and the V4 will either have to be expelled or the EU eats humble pie and then everyone will feel that they can break the rules.

 

Why do I choose to live within its borders despite being anti-EU? Because the EU is all but finished. I'll give it another five years at most. Hopefully then we can all have the trading agreement that we voted to join and non of this self-serving politico-legal monolith that the EU has grown into behind our backs.

[Birdbrain]

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-07 11:37 AM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-07-06 7:43 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-06 6:56 PM

747 - 2020-07-06 12:34 PM...……………………….So the EU is looking after its member States ..... absolutely hilarious. In the 2008/9 economic downturn they did nothing ... until it looked like the Euro would collapse, along with the EU. Southern European countries were bankrupted while Northern ones protected themselves. The Covid epidemic was past its peak when they reluctantly offered some financial aid. It is a club with first and second class members, we are in the second group.

I think this misrepresents what the EU can do/could have done. The EU has no funding stream for such interventions. It requires unanimity of all member states to change its budget.

 

Those countries in trouble in 2010 were suffering from their own economic mismanagement (plus in several cases - most notably Greece - their cheating in order to qualify for Euro membership) and the other member states were uninclined to underwrite their profligacy.

 

Economic measures were eventually agreed, but not as a direct result of the 2008 crash. That merely exposed those who'd been skinny dipping, to quote Warren Buffet's popular phrase of the time.

 

The EU had no role in their predicaments, that had brought that on themselves. The real reason for the bail-outs was to protect the Euro from the impact of a number of countries re-introducing their old currencies in order to devalue. The bail-outs were judged a less damaging option.

 

Are you saying Greece and "other member states" conned the EU ??? ... No way that cant be right

Yes, as was widely reported at the time, various countries, most notably Greece, "cooked their books" by concealing substantial debts with the aid of various financial institutions - that most referenced at the time being Goldman Sachs. It was also suggested that the EU were aware this was happening, but were more anxious to ensure that the maximum number of member states joined the €, to give it weight on international markets as a disincentive to speculation. As a new currency, it needed to have, and maintain, "critical mass" in the interests of value stability. It seems to have been a case of "needs must when the devil drives". To that extent, it worked.

 

Crikey who'd have thought it ... The Euro and therefore the EU built on on the back of cooked books and dodgy accountants ... I just cant believe it

[John52]

What do you think the £ is built on *-)

[John52]

Nicepix - 2020-07-07 7:03 PM

 

The UK had the worst deal. I.

 

UK did not claim what it was entitled to.

We could have claimed EU grants to improve our public owned infrastructure like other member did.

But the UK govt preferred to privatise everything, costing several times as much, but the cost taken off the balance sheet and deferred until after the next election by lucrative PFI deals for party donors.

Like Housing minister Jenricks illegally pushing through Tory donor Desmonds planning application early to avoid him paying his dues.

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-07-07 4:01 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-07 2:02 PM...………………..If the EU is really that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt (and it may well be all of those things, who knows?) then why on earth would leave voters choose to live within it's borders?

:-S

And why would the other 27 member states all wish to remain a part of it - unless of course, the Brexiters think the other 27 states are also "that bad, that poorly run and that corrupt", in which case they at least show consistent prejudice! :-D

 

Half of that 27 are net recievers ;-) ..........and the other half prolly see paying off the Fourth Reich as a cheaper option than having them invade again >:-) ..........

 

 

 

 

[Birdbrain]

John52 - 2020-07-08 8:28 AM

 

What do you think the £ is built on *-)

 

I dont know , you do obviously ... Please tell

[Birdbrain]

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 12:44 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-07 11:54 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 9:53 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-06 9:04 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-06 6:46 PM

 

jumpstart - 2020-07-06 5:30 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-06 11:54 AM

 

Whilst those who voted to leave would have done so for a number of reasons, please lets not pretend that the "main" reason that Mr/Mrs Average Brexiteer- in- the- street voted as he/she did , was anything to do with "trade deals", and who we were/weren't able to have them with.... *-)

 

No, it was clear from the subject matter in the main media, and the "talk" on social media (very much including this forum) that at the time it wasn't about the above, it was about all those funny "Johnnie Foreigner" types who were supposedly "..comin' ova 'ere..takin' our jobs..cloggin' up our NHS..and scroungin' our benefits.." etc etc.

 

Also for some, the fact that we (the UK) were having to sit around a table with the aforementioned Johnnie Foreigners' representatives, instead of at the head of it, was never ever going to sit well...

 

:-S

 

I know it’s fashionable to say that was all about “foreigners” but funnily enough trade and how the EU fails it’s citizens was what people voted on.

 

That might have been your reasons but it certainly wasnt the reasons most people voted for Brexit.

 

)

 

You never learn do you? How on earth have you got the detailed information to evidence that claim?

 

No wonder nobody takes you seriously.

 

(lol) Seriously? Have you been on a desert island for four years or something? You really would have had to either been cut off from the rest of the world or been walking around with your head up your arse not to believe that immigration was the single biggest reason people voted for Brexit. All the polling leading up to the Brexit vote showed this. Of course after the vote was won as if by magic those that cited immigration as their main reason for voting to leave the EU suddenly decided it was not their main concern after all and the figures citing Immigration as a main concern dropped dramatically. Odd huh? *-)

 

Breaking point anyone?

 

You cannot say with any authority that most people who voted for Brexit did so because of any one reason. If you can then prove it by showing us where the information concerning every voter's reasons can be found. It is pure snobbery put about by people who simply cannot accept democracy. My wife's ex-boss runs 7 veterinary surgeries, no mug, and he voted Leave because the EU is strangling his business with all its unnecessary regulations designed merely to keep the EU's economies ticking along.

 

Both sides are as guilty as each other of being mis-informed. I can point to friends and customers who voted Remain simply down to personal circumstances; one for example points to EU funding at the university where his wife works. He doesn't know for sure whether the UK Government would take up the funding, but he voted Remain because he wasn't sure. Another couple who require expensive medication that is currently provided by the mutual agreements voted Remain because they weren't sure whether they would have to pay for it in future. I'll wager that hundreds of thousands in each camp voted the same way; for personal, not national interests. There is a political saying that to overcome the inertia of not changing you need a lot of votes. The 52:48 split doesn't represent truly the country's feelings.

 

Of those Remain supporters I have spoken to at length about this issue not one knew of the EU's manifesto. Not one had heard of the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction' that lays a clear path to an EU army, EU border guards, further integration of politics and financial controls including the appointment of an EU Head of Finance who could over rule member state's budgets or spending plans. Not one knew that the EU absorbed 80% of all import duties on goods coming in from outside the EU. Not one knew the EU creamed off some of the VAT everybody pays. Three Visions, One Direction is an Orwelian document put together by the EU's press office is the fruit of Merkel, Macron and Junckers who are all arch-Fedralists. In fact you will find it difficult to find anyone who is not hell bent on Federalism and "More Europe". in the EU heirachy That is one of the big problems with the EU; there is no balance. So Europe is sleepwalking into a nightmare scenario akin to the USSR.

 

Brexit might seem to be a big leap in the dark. A bit like jumping off a moving train. But when you know where that train is heading, the risk of jumping into the unknown is better than arriving meekly at the known.

 

Go and do some research yourself. Look at the polls for around early 2016. By a country mile you will see the majority cited Immigration as a key reason for voting to leave the EU. Well that and lots of stupid EU laws that when pressed nobody could ever think of any apart from the made up one about Bananas.

 

I am sure you can show a few personal examples of clever people who voted to leave or remainers that had a vested interest in remaining. So what? It proves nothing. Over thirty million people voted. 99% of them probably didnt understand the stuff you just googled about the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction'. The most popular search in the UK on google the day after the referendum was "what is the EU?".

 

The UK had the best deal out of all the countries within the EU with more opt outs including opt outs from further federalisation than any other member. EU Army? So what? Why would that be such a bad thing and even if it ever did happen which is unlikely why would we not want to be part of it and if we didnt we can just veto it or not participate. We kind of have joint military operations already anyway. The fear of an EU army by Brexiteers is just typical of their distrust of Johnny Foreigner. Like somehow we are just better than they are or the thought of our brave soldiers being ordered about by some Frenchman is just too much to bear for some of them. Anyway its irrelevant as Brexit was won on a s**t load of lies and plane old racism. Democracy? Dont make me laugh. Our Democracy died in 2016.

 

 

"Our Democracy died in 2016" ... You conveniently forget all the legal challenges to the result you dont like , the treacherous MPs , the 2 general elections ... Democracy hasn't "died" , accepting results seems to though

[Guest pelmetman]

spospe - 2020-07-06 5:53 PM

 

I asked, when will we see the benefits?

 

I mean unambiguous benefits, ones that can only be ascribed to leaving the EU.

 

When?

 

1/1/2021 UK consumer prices will fall B-) ..........

 

https://iea.org.uk/the-eus-thousands-of-senseless-tariffs-punish-the-poor/

 

15% off half a bike :D ..........

 

 

[malc d]

spospe - 2020-07-06 5:53 PM

 

I asked, when will we see the benefits?

 

I mean unambiguous benefits, ones that can only be ascribed to leaving the EU.

 

When?

 

 

As you can see from this thread so far, no one knows !

 

Everyone still guessing ( with a bias either way ).

 

:-|

[Brian Kirby]

teflon2 - 2020-07-07 6:49 PM...……………….So you seem to accept that lies, cheating deceit and fraud is OK when it's expedient. No wonder you wanted to remain in the EU as they are past masters at it. (!)

I'm sorry John, but the above is the kind of ludicrous, reductio ad absurdum, comment that makes all sensible discussion impossible.

 

First, the states that engaged in debt hiding did so of their own volition in order to get into the Euro. Second, if the EU were as aware at the time as the rumours suggested (but why am I telling you this, weren't you in UK at the time of the Euro launch?) they had a choice: either pull the Euro launch, launch in the midst of an international row over the exclusion of the "dodgy" states - of which there were several, not just Greece, which would itself have prejudiced confidence in the fledgling currency - or let them in and launch anyway in the hope that time, and events, would allow the Euro to become accepted internationally as a safely tradeable currency.

 

For political reasons, they chose the latter. It is called realpolitik: it is what politicians do when confronted with unpalatable truths.

 

If you really think that other politicians, from other countries, faced with similarly awkward decisions, behave any differently, you must have spent your life in a hermetically sealed echo chamber. :-D

 

Are you really trying to argue that politics in other EU countries is conducted in a less honest, more corrupt, environment than our own, or just that when those politicians become involved at EU level they become corrupted, dishonest, actors?.

 

Just look back at what our own politicians have told us about the EEC/EU since we joined, and then check those statements against what the record shows. You will find copious instances of UK ministers, more than a handful of MEPs, and any number of journalists who, to coin a phrase, were "economical with la verité".

 

The EU, being a confederation of (at that time - 1995) 11 states, with a further three about to join, just made the political processes more fraught, so the realpolitik more necessary to assist getting their previously agreed objectives implemented.

 

Do you really think the UK is exempt from this? So why should the EU have to become this unique paragon of virtue? To make omelettes, one must break eggs. It is reality.

[Barryd999]

Birdbrain - 2020-07-08 9:00 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 12:44 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-07 11:54 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-07 9:53 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-07-06 9:04 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-07-06 6:46 PM

 

jumpstart - 2020-07-06 5:30 PM

 

pepe63 - 2020-07-06 11:54 AM

 

Whilst those who voted to leave would have done so for a number of reasons, please lets not pretend that the "main" reason that Mr/Mrs Average Brexiteer- in- the- street voted as he/she did , was anything to do with "trade deals", and who we were/weren't able to have them with.... *-)

 

No, it was clear from the subject matter in the main media, and the "talk" on social media (very much including this forum) that at the time it wasn't about the above, it was about all those funny "Johnnie Foreigner" types who were supposedly "..comin' ova 'ere..takin' our jobs..cloggin' up our NHS..and scroungin' our benefits.." etc etc.

 

Also for some, the fact that we (the UK) were having to sit around a table with the aforementioned Johnnie Foreigners' representatives, instead of at the head of it, was never ever going to sit well...

 

:-S

 

I know it’s fashionable to say that was all about “foreigners” but funnily enough trade and how the EU fails it’s citizens was what people voted on.

 

That might have been your reasons but it certainly wasnt the reasons most people voted for Brexit.

 

)

 

You never learn do you? How on earth have you got the detailed information to evidence that claim?

 

No wonder nobody takes you seriously.

 

(lol) Seriously? Have you been on a desert island for four years or something? You really would have had to either been cut off from the rest of the world or been walking around with your head up your arse not to believe that immigration was the single biggest reason people voted for Brexit. All the polling leading up to the Brexit vote showed this. Of course after the vote was won as if by magic those that cited immigration as their main reason for voting to leave the EU suddenly decided it was not their main concern after all and the figures citing Immigration as a main concern dropped dramatically. Odd huh? *-)

 

Breaking point anyone?

 

You cannot say with any authority that most people who voted for Brexit did so because of any one reason. If you can then prove it by showing us where the information concerning every voter's reasons can be found. It is pure snobbery put about by people who simply cannot accept democracy. My wife's ex-boss runs 7 veterinary surgeries, no mug, and he voted Leave because the EU is strangling his business with all its unnecessary regulations designed merely to keep the EU's economies ticking along.

 

Both sides are as guilty as each other of being mis-informed. I can point to friends and customers who voted Remain simply down to personal circumstances; one for example points to EU funding at the university where his wife works. He doesn't know for sure whether the UK Government would take up the funding, but he voted Remain because he wasn't sure. Another couple who require expensive medication that is currently provided by the mutual agreements voted Remain because they weren't sure whether they would have to pay for it in future. I'll wager that hundreds of thousands in each camp voted the same way; for personal, not national interests. There is a political saying that to overcome the inertia of not changing you need a lot of votes. The 52:48 split doesn't represent truly the country's feelings.

 

Of those Remain supporters I have spoken to at length about this issue not one knew of the EU's manifesto. Not one had heard of the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction' that lays a clear path to an EU army, EU border guards, further integration of politics and financial controls including the appointment of an EU Head of Finance who could over rule member state's budgets or spending plans. Not one knew that the EU absorbed 80% of all import duties on goods coming in from outside the EU. Not one knew the EU creamed off some of the VAT everybody pays. Three Visions, One Direction is an Orwelian document put together by the EU's press office is the fruit of Merkel, Macron and Junckers who are all arch-Fedralists. In fact you will find it difficult to find anyone who is not hell bent on Federalism and "More Europe". in the EU heirachy That is one of the big problems with the EU; there is no balance. So Europe is sleepwalking into a nightmare scenario akin to the USSR.

 

Brexit might seem to be a big leap in the dark. A bit like jumping off a moving train. But when you know where that train is heading, the risk of jumping into the unknown is better than arriving meekly at the known.

 

Go and do some research yourself. Look at the polls for around early 2016. By a country mile you will see the majority cited Immigration as a key reason for voting to leave the EU. Well that and lots of stupid EU laws that when pressed nobody could ever think of any apart from the made up one about Bananas.

 

I am sure you can show a few personal examples of clever people who voted to leave or remainers that had a vested interest in remaining. So what? It proves nothing. Over thirty million people voted. 99% of them probably didnt understand the stuff you just googled about the EU publication 'Three Visions, One Direction'. The most popular search in the UK on google the day after the referendum was "what is the EU?".

 

The UK had the best deal out of all the countries within the EU with more opt outs including opt outs from further federalisation than any other member. EU Army? So what? Why would that be such a bad thing and even if it ever did happen which is unlikely why would we not want to be part of it and if we didnt we can just veto it or not participate. We kind of have joint military operations already anyway. The fear of an EU army by Brexiteers is just typical of their distrust of Johnny Foreigner. Like somehow we are just better than they are or the thought of our brave soldiers being ordered about by some Frenchman is just too much to bear for some of them. Anyway its irrelevant as Brexit was won on a s**t load of lies and plane old racism. Democracy? Dont make me laugh. Our Democracy died in 2016.

 

 

"Our Democracy died in 2016" ... You conveniently forget all the legal challenges to the result you dont like , the treacherous MPs , the 2 general elections ... Democracy hasn't "died" , accepting results seems to though

 

And you forget the real reason there were so many legal challenges, MPs objections, resignations and defections, two general elections and the biggest demonstrations the country has ever seen. Why do you think we had never seen the like of all that before? Did you ever seem me complaining or demonstrating about unfair or undemocratic elections before 2016 or anyone else for that matter? No, because the reason for all that was the undemocratic, dishonest and illegal way the entire referendum was carried out and then the continuation of that in the following years leading up to where we are now facing down the barrel of a No deal gun that apparently nobody voted for and nobody wanted.

 

So yes. It killed democracy and divided a nation for probably not just one generation.