Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Fuzzar

OT - EU straw poll...

Recommended Posts

The point is very many remain politicians either abstained or voted against .

They did this in the hope of stopping brexit

If they had decided that compromise was the order of the day then it would be all over

Unfortunately compromise has never seen the light of day 

We will deserve the brexit we will get.

And I think we have bounced this post more than enough so I am going to agree to disagree 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bagster said:

The point is very many remain politicians either abstained or voted against .

They did this in the hope of stopping brexit

If they had decided that compromise was the order of the day then it would be all over

Unfortunately compromise has never seen the light of day 

We will deserve the brexit we will get.

And I think we have bounced this post more than enough so I am going to agree to disagree 😉

I can agree with that  😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bagster said:

In the last decade or so politicians have imposed many things on society.

In the building trade we have seen ridiculous levels of health and safety. Ex I have been on new building sites where you get a yellow card if you fail to use a stepladder in the correct way.two offences and you lose your job. I have seen bricklaying crews sent home for not having suncream! I could go on all night about CCTV, ect ect but I will leave you with that.

We have had stupid accreditation systems hoisted on us and a health safety exam which can only be described as ludicrous. Ex if you get a nail stuck in your foot do you

A , take it out and say nothing

B , leave it in because your boot won't fall off

C, inform the Safety officer and get it treated.

I was just wondering what have politicians imposed on themselves. Do they have to have accreditation to prove they can do the job?

I think at the very least they should be wearing hard hats in the commons 😉

My point is, there seems to be quite alot of c r a p politicians so isn't it time they reaped what they sow 😉

You should move to France in that case. All very laissez-faire as far as health and safety in the building trade goes.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn those health and safety nutters. I want to be able to work on a site where my life is at risk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did that my purple friend

The health and safety is wonderful in it's non existence  🙂

its a shame that the system that they have in place for the self employed is going to kill me from stress first. 😉

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bagster said:

You just use your common sense Hermie, oh yes I forgot 😉

It is  all about common sense as you say Bagster. You can do your utmost to provide a safe working environment, safe systems, training, protective clothing etc.. but there has to be some responsibility taken for your own safety and how your actions may affect others.👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bagster said:

I did that my purple friend

The health and safety is wonderful in it's non existence  🙂

its a shame that the system that they have in place for the self employed is going to kill me from stress first. 😉

 

Isn't the norm over there that you pay a local accountant a few euros to take the stress away, i.e. much the same as over here really.. apart from the currency obviously    😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Bagster said:

The point is very many remain politicians either abstained or voted against .

They did this in the hope of stopping brexit

If they had decided that compromise was the order of the day then it would be all over

Unfortunately compromise has never seen the light of day 

We will deserve the brexit we will get.

And I think we have bounced this post more than enough so I am going to agree to disagree 😉

The problem, leaving aside leg-pulling over France and H&C, is that it is easy to say that now, given the messy impasse that has been reached, and the threat of No-Deal.  But at no point since the referendum was set in motion has it been possible to say with even a smidgen of likelihood what the outcome would be, and why and how that outcome would be reached. And it still  is not.

You are saying that Remainers should have voted for some kind of compromise Brexit they did not like at the outset when it was not at all clear that it would not be possible to achieve a much better (ie softer, from their point of view) Brexit or even to scupper Brexit. And that dilemma still exists.

If anyone could say now what the outcome will be, and how and why, then it would be possible to assess that outcome against the viable alternatives and decide definitively what option to plump for. But your are still asking many MPs to throw away their preferred option even though it might otherwise come to pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" But at no point since the referendum was set in motion has it been possible to say with even a smidgen of likelihood what the outcome would be "

 

Whereas in Nov 2016 i sated that brexit would not happen - and since have been able to predict each twist as that screw fits ever tighter.

Back then the idea of no brexit was way off the scale as far as anyone on here was thinking. Yet here we are almost 3 years to the day and it is pretty much the last feasible option. And one that certain posters have been recently including as a possibility.

No deal will not be allowed to happen. Any deal to leave does not have the Parliamentary time to pass so would need a vry, very long extension.

Guff about soft brexits, Norway pro plus, canada dry. CM 2 are just that...ignorant guff. The UK is either in or out, that's all.

And for those interested then perhaps they might care to ask why was I posting up about the next PM facing a vote of no  confidence way before MPs or the much fabled 'comentators' were even mentioning it ?  In fact I even posted way back last August that they would be an extension. How they all piled in about May getting a deal through. How the EU always backed down at the last minute etc.

Yes, you know who you are 😥

But cling to your delusions, it makes for a bit of amusement I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here comes the problem any "leader" will have trying to corral this lot - the goalposts for their support will always be moved. Every concession will be met with more demands. In the US we have the 30 Representative "Freedom Caucus", an oxymoron if ever there was one, who dragged the Republican Party ever rightward because of a stupid internal to Republican party rule that they wouldn't pass any legislation if it needed Democrat support. 

It's best just to tell these idiots that they can leave and join another party if they want, there is zero danger of Farage's company ever winning a general election, but a massive risk of allowing the fear of Farage's followers driving the Tories even further to the right. It's happening over here, it will happen there too.

 

Johnson’s lead increased significantly on Tuesday’s vote when he only managed to gain 12 extra votes. However, key members of the European Research Group of hard Brexiter Tory MPs have begun issuing coded warnings to the frontrunner about the limits of their support.

Members of the group were alarmed by Johnson’s refusal to be drawn on offering any guarantee of the UK leaving the EU on 31 October beyond saying it was “eminently feasible”.

His evasiveness was highlighted by Hunt, who told the BBC on Wednesday: “Boris has made a big play of saying we’ll leave, deal or no deal, on October 31. Yesterday, frankly, he suggested he wouldn’t be so absolute in that,” Hunt said. “I’m not entirely sure what he believes on this.”

One prominent Brexiter, when asked what would happen to Johnson if he reneged on his pledge to Eurosceptics that the UK would be out by 31 October, said: “The same thing that happened to Theresa May – only a lot quicker.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Purple there must come a time where people accept that there was a referendum and they lost. If Remain had won then that would've been the end of it.

Acceptance would've come with the advantage that although you lost you could shape what brexit actually looks like.

In fact we would not have such a divided country that we currently have, Remain voters have to take responsibility for that.

They have quite honestly behaved in a very un British way. They have taken defeat very badly.

I feel sad for them but in my opinion they are making things worse.

Instead they have polarised opinion, people are getting hateful  and the likelihood of the sort of brexit they feared most has become more likely.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bill said:

" But at no point since the referendum was set in motion has it been possible to say with even a smidgen of likelihood what the outcome would be "

 

Whereas in Nov 2016 i sated that brexit would not happen - and since have been able to predict each twist as that screw fits ever tighter.

Back then the idea of no brexit was way off the scale as far as anyone on here was thinking. Yet here we are almost 3 years to the day and it is pretty much the last feasible option. And one that certain posters have been recently including as a possibility.

No deal will not be allowed to happen. Any deal to leave does not have the Parliamentary time to pass so would need a vry, very long extension.

Guff about soft brexits, Norway pro plus, canada dry. CM 2 are just that...ignorant guff. The UK is either in or out, that's all.

And for those interested then perhaps they might care to ask why was I posting up about the next PM facing a vote of no  confidence way before MPs or the much fabled 'comentators' were even mentioning it ?  In fact I even posted way back last August that they would be an extension. How they all piled in about May getting a deal through. How the EU always backed down at the last minute etc.

Yes, you know who you are 😥

But cling to your delusions, it makes for a bit of amusement I suppose.

I hate to blow my own trumpet but as you insist on posting guff I have to point out that since May 2016 I said the best way forward for the UK is to leave with no deal, start on WTO rules and then begin to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. 

I suggest that scenario is far more likely than Brexit not happening, though at the moment I concede that someone deal will be reached and my optimal approach will not happen. 

You say Brexit will be stopped but you don't offer up a plan as to how that might happen. A withdrawal of Article 50 would mean the end of the political party that withdrew it. The Brexit Party has arisen from nowhere in a matter of weeks to become a huge check and balance against any attempt to majorly water down Brexit. That BP are currently leading the polls should tell you that the traditional parties have to take it seriously. It's no longer possible for the politicians to ignore the country. The likelihood of no Brexit is less than the moon is made of cheese. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bagster said:

But Purple there must come a time where people accept that there was a referendum and they lost. If Remain had won then that would've been the end of it.

Acceptance would've come with the advantage that although you lost you could shape what brexit actually looks like.

In fact we would not have such a divided country that we currently have, Remain voters have to take responsibility for that.

They have quite honestly behaved in a very un British way. They have taken defeat very badly.

I feel sad for them but in my opinion they are making things worse.

Instead they have polarised opinion, people are getting hateful  and the likelihood of the sort of brexit they feared most has become more likely.

 

 

Bagster, many Remainers have accepted that they lost and that Brexit should happen. Their argument was and is that while they accept the UK should leave, and they accept May's  Withdrawal Agreement, they believe - correctly - that the terms of the political declaration May added to the WA will lead to significant economic damage. i am not sure it is always understood, for example, that Labour really has no problem with the WA. It is the Hard-Brexit political declaration it objects to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

I hate to blow my own trumpet but as you insist on posting guff I have to point out that since May 2016 I said the best way forward for the UK is to leave with no deal, start on WTO rules and then begin to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. 

I suggest that scenario is far more likely than Brexit not happening, though at the moment I concede that someone deal will be reached and my optimal approach will not happen. 

You say Brexit will be stopped but you don't offer up a plan as to how that might happen. A withdrawal of Article 50 would mean the end of the political party that withdrew it. The Brexit Party has arisen from nowhere in a matter of weeks to become a huge check and balance against any attempt to majorly water down Brexit. That BP are currently leading the polls should tell you that the traditional parties have to take it seriously. It's no longer possible for the politicians to ignore the country. The likelihood of no Brexit is less than the moon is made of cheese. 

He needs “some time” to answer that question 😀, yet unsurprisingly had plenty of time to write the load of BS  we see in his last post.

In fact I have asked him the question several times and he has consistently failed to answer, he prefers to reply instead with his usual deluded lies about other posters and obfuscation.

The only conclusion to be drawn is he has “no idea” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely if that is so then they failed to take advantage of the indicative vote.

I honestly thought it was all over 

Because there are many leavers that would be quite content with CM2

In my opinion Many Leavers especially the older generation thought that mastrict was a betrayal of the first referendum.

I was a child at the time so can't comment but when you look at the voting numbers between the two referendums the figures are damming for the Remain side.

If you consider that alot of the 8 million plus newer voters would've voted remain , it makes me wonder how many of the original voters changed their minds.

Now I'll be honest with you, I have lived in France since 1999 and there is one quite important fact that has gone unnoticed.

Can you guess what it is ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

GATT 24 is an article of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Supporters of a no-deal Brexit say it would allow the UK to continue to trade with the EU without tariffs for up to 10 years, while the two sides were negotiating a permanent future trade agreement.

But you can't use it in this way - a trade agreement has to be agreed in principle before Article 24 can be used.

It also needs the two sides to agree - the UK can't just impose it on the EU.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/regatt_e.htm#gatt)

More ill-informed nonsense from Paul Moy.

 

A trade agreement will be agreed in principle as soon as we tell the EU we are leaving with No Deal.  Mark my words. The EU need one more than us as we've said all along because they sell tens of billions more goods to us than we sell to them every year. 

The EU offered us a trade agreement but May refused it BTW !!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bagster said:

But surely if that is so then they failed to take advantage of the indicative vote.

I honestly thought it was all over 

Because there are many leavers that would be quite content with CM2

In my opinion Many Leavers especially the older generation thought that mastrict was a betrayal of the first referendum.

I was a child at the time so can't comment but when you look at the voting numbers between the two referendums the figures are damming for the Remain side.

If you consider that alot of the 8 million plus newer voters would've voted remain , it makes me wonder how many of the original voters changed their minds.

Now I'll be honest with you, I have lived in France since 1999 and there is one quite important fact that has gone unnoticed.

Can you guess what it is ?

 

I am willing to make a fool of myself by guessing wrongly, but that is way too vague. An important unnoticed fact connected to what? To you living in France? To your views on Brexit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, paul moy said:

A trade agreement will be agreed in principle as soon as we tell the EU we are leaving with No Deal.  Mark my words. The EU need one more than us as we've said all along because they sell tens of billions more goods to us than we sell to them every year. 

The EU offered us a trade agreement but May refused it BTW !!  

You've been repeating this bollox for three years. It was bollox back then, it is bollox now and it will still be bollox in a few months time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A chill wind is coming, according to Ambrose Evans Pritchard:

 

Europe has been warned. Any use of monetary levers to hold down the euro exchange rate will be deemed a provocation by the Trump administratio n.

Further cuts in interest rates to minus 0.5pc or beyond will be scrutinized for currency manipulation. A revival of quantitative easingwill be considered a devaluation policy in disguise, as indeed it is, since the money leaks out into global securities and depresses the euro.

The Bank for International Settlements says €300bn of Europe’s QE funding reached London alone between 2014 and 2017.

If the ECB copies the Swiss National Bank and starts to amass foreign assets directly to cap currency strength Europe will face certain retaliation.

Whether the Swiss can get away with their policy for much longer is an open question. The SNB has foreign holdings of $760bn - near 120pc of GDP - and owns slices of Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, and Exxon.

As the global economy falters we are entering the next phase of currency warfare. There is going to be an ugly fight for scare global demand.

What is striking about Donald Trump’s tweets against the ECB this week is how quick he was to see the significance of Mario Draghi’s policy pirouette in Sintra - already dubbed ‘whatever it takes II’ by bond markets - and how quickly he pounced:

 

Mario Draghi just announced more stimulus could come, which immediately dropped the Euro against the Dollar, making it unfairly easier for them to compete against the USA. They have been getting away with this for years, along with China and others.

 
 
 
 

This has the imprint of his trade guru Peter Navarro.

 

The dollar is of course over-valued. The Federal Reserve’s broad dollar index reached a 17-year high in early June. The manufacturing trade deficit has ballooned to $900bn.

These imbalances have been made worse by Mr Trump’s own policies. His tax cuts at the top of the cycle have pushed the budget deficit to 4pc of GDP.  They forced the Fed to jam on the brakes last year.

This ‘loose fiscal/tight money’ regime is the textbook formula for a strong currency. But the White House is not going to admit this. It is going to blame foreigners, and foreigners are not innocent either.

The eurozone is chief global parasite. It has been sucking demand out of the global economy with current account surpluses of €300bn to €400bn. China is a saint by comparison. This ‘free rider’ behaviour is the result of the euro structure and the austerity bias of the Stability Pact and German ideology amplified through currency union.

The rest of the world pays the price for euroland’s half-built experiment and its failure to stimulate, that is to say its failure to create a joint treasury with shared debt issuance that would make an investment revival possible in the depressed half of Europe.

Mr Navarro has special twist on this: the warped mechanism of monetary union allows Germany to keep the implicit Deutsche Mark “grossly undervalued” and to lock in a beggar-thy-neighbour trade advantage over southern Europe.  Hence Germany’s chronic current account surplus of 8.5pc of GDP.

 

Mr Trump’s White House has had enough of this and the battleground is over the currency. Democrats are singing from the same hymn sheet. Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has launched a campaign of “economic patriotism” with active currency management.

The Economic Policy Institute in Washington proposes buying the bonds of any country engaged in currency manipulation to neutralize the effect. The US Treasury is in charge of currency policy and can effectively order the Fed to support US foreign policy objectives.

It reminds me of the Reagan Doctrine during the Cold War: playing Moscow at its own game by sponsoring guerrilla insurgencies (Nicaragua, Afghanistan, etc). It bled the Soviet Union dry.

This is the new world order that Mario Draghi faces as he tries to stop the eurozone sliding into a deflationary quagmire. The ECB’s market measure of inflation expectations - 5-year/5-year swaps - have collapsed with all the nefast consequences this has for nominal GDP growth and Italy’s debt trajectory.

Yields on 10-year Bunds have crashed to minus 0.30pc. The bond markets are signalling an ice age. Clearly the decision to shut down the €2.6 trillion QE programme in January and declare mission accomplished - when Euroland was already in an industrial recession - was a policy blunder. It was forced upon Mr Draghi by hawks.

 

He is now taking revenge on the ECB’s governing council with a fait accompli.  Unless the eurozone starts to recover “additional stimulus will be required”, and for good measure: “if the crisis has shown anything, it is that we will use all the flexibility within our mandate to fulfil our mandate,” he said in Sintra.

This pledge was made without first securing the consent of the Teutonic bloc. Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats called it “an alarming signal for the ECB’s integrity”. This time Mr Draghi may have overreached in every sense.

The ECB can of course buy corporate bonds and bank debt (a shield for Italy). It can do some stealth monetisation of public debt.  But plain-vanilla QE at this stage is tinkering. Little more stimulus can be extracted by pulling down the long end of the yield curve. The curve is near inversion already.

“It is ceremonial. The ECB is  powerless. It is scrounging about trying to create a sense of action, but none of this has any effect,” says Ashoka Mody, a former bail-out chief in Europe for the IMF and author of Eurotragedy: a Drama in Nine Acts.

The deflationary cancer is now so deeply lodged in the eurozone that it would take Helicopter money or People’s QE - monetary financing of public works - to fight off any future global slump. Such action would violate the Lisbon Treaty and would test German political acquiescence in the euro project to destruction.

 

In truth, QE in Europe has always worked chiefly through devaluation.  The euro’s trade-weighted index fell 14pc a year after Mr Draghi first signalled in 2014 that bond purchases were coming. That was powerful stimulus. When the euro climbed back up the eurozone economy stalled.

It takes permanent suppression of the exchange rate to keep euroland going.  As the Japanese have discovered, it is very hard for an economy with near zero inflation and a structural trade surplus to stop its exchange rate rising unless it resorts to overt currency warfare. That is exactly what Mr Trump is not going to allow.

Every avenue of monetary stimulus is cut off in the eurozone. Only fiscal stimulus a l’outrance - 2pc or 3pc of GDP -  will be enough to weather a serious crisis. That too is blocked.

“The ECB has masked the fragility over the last seven years and nobody knows when the hour of truth will come,” said Jean Pisani-Ferry, economic adviser to France’s Emmanuel Macron and a fellow at the Bruegel think tank.

“There is no common deposit scheme for banks. Cross-border investments are retreating. The vicious circle between banks and states could come return any moment,” he said.   

 

Mario Draghi’s rhetorical coup in July 2012 worked only because he secured a partial approval from Germany for the ECB to act as lender-of-last resort for Italy’s debt (under strict conditions). That immediately halted an artificial crisis. The situation today is entirely different. The threat is a deflationary slump. The ECB has no answer to this.

Markets thought they heard a replay of ‘whatever it takes’ in Mr Draghi’s speech and hit the buy button. But economists heard another note in Sintra: a plaintive appeal for EMU fiscal union before it is too late.

The exhausted monetary warrior was telling us that the ECB cannot alone save the European project a second time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Herman said:

Johnson it is then. What a **** country this has become.

😀👇

rory9.png?resize=540,98&ssl=1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

I hate to blow my own trumpet but as you insist on posting guff I have to point out that since May 2016 I said the best way forward for the UK is to leave with no deal, start on WTO rules and then begin to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. 

I suggest that scenario is far more likely than Brexit not happening, though at the moment I concede that someone deal will be reached and my optimal approach will not happen.

More lies, as you have repeatedly told us that you voted for a 'soft brexit' .

As to the nonsensical twaddle about a deal After the UK drops out of the EU, I leave others to work out whether hand crank is talking out out of his ar.se as usual

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45112872

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It reminds me of the Reagan Doctrine during the Cold War: playing Moscow at its own game by sponsoring guerrilla insurgencies (Nicaragua, Afghanistan, etc). It bled the Soviet Union dry. "

 

Another barefaced lie.

Unless the Korean and Vietnam wars did not happen.

The US supported insurgents in Nicaragua for 20 ears prior to WW2

and has sought to undermine legitimate governments in a whole host of Latin American countries and those of South East Asia with clandestine support and activities throughout the 20th century.

The view being to protest the supply of raw goods and markets. Nothing to do with your ill informed guff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jools said:

😀👇

rory9.png?resize=540,98&ssl=1

 

Although he was still a proper tory he was the only one willing to tell the proper facts. That they kicked him out rather than face reality speaks volumes. That people like you are happy about it shows how low this country has got. Sad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@PurpleCanary

The date was,  is the clue

1999 is 20 years

Subtract 3 to the referendum and amazingly you end up with 17

Something happens to expats at 15 years 😉

In other words I lost my right to vote

Therefore my vote was always just theoretical 😉

Not quite sure why or how this could happen as surely it would have an effect on EU expats.but it is what it is.

Now my vote would've been a theoretical Remain but was changed to a theoretical leave.

Strange thing to do, probably, but the Remain reaction made it inevitable that I would not sit that side of the table.

Now I note that you said "many" remainers had accepted the result.

So I was wondering which one's on here do you think have 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

I hate to blow my own trumpet

You may as well; no one else will. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be interested to know how many other people believe that VW has various other names including

Me

rtB

Jools

Plus more I would think.

Or do we all accept that Bill is a delusional character 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×