Brexit
- Thread starter icebreaker
- Start date
Come off it. It was an anaemic list. Really want to go through it again? You should have read it before posting it.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
I don't need to go through it again. You need to go through it again. 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36471989
this is the key. As we have seen on here many Brit haters want t believe that dislike of the eu is something to do with past empires but the uk is on a par with most states and behind France in the proportion of those with a negative attitude to the failed project.
why remain might make sense is that with such numbers actually hostile then there will be an electoral push towards pressure to reform in a progressive rather than retrograde manner. You can quite easily count in many pro European Union voters in favour of a reform to cut back heavily the bureaucracy and release powers back to democratic governments.
Netherlands is pushing back and Austria was a hairs breath away from electing a seriously anti eu leadership.
the trouble is that old Europe does not give up bureaucratic powers easily. And being a virtual dictatorship there is no immediate pressure to do so.
Maybe warbler can suggest a military solution.
this is the key. As we have seen on here many Brit haters want t believe that dislike of the eu is something to do with past empires but the uk is on a par with most states and behind France in the proportion of those with a negative attitude to the failed project.
why remain might make sense is that with such numbers actually hostile then there will be an electoral push towards pressure to reform in a progressive rather than retrograde manner. You can quite easily count in many pro European Union voters in favour of a reform to cut back heavily the bureaucracy and release powers back to democratic governments.
Netherlands is pushing back and Austria was a hairs breath away from electing a seriously anti eu leadership.
the trouble is that old Europe does not give up bureaucratic powers easily. And being a virtual dictatorship there is no immediate pressure to do so.
Maybe warbler can suggest a military solution.
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
There is a world of difference between having a negative view of something, and wanting to leave it.
People tend to hold negatives view of most National governments too, but it doesn't mean that they want revolution.
People tend to hold negatives view of most National governments too, but it doesn't mean that they want revolution.
Colin Phillips
At the Start
..........come the revolution.
so the % with a negative view in the uk is about the same as that telling pollsters they will vote brexit. Isn't it almost identical?
there is no reason at all why it would be different elsewhere and France for one has a party garnering a significant % of the vote on an explicitly anti eu platform. We have no such party here ...officially
the eu is despised right across Europe by millions not just by "Brits" Live with it
Your comments about brits "not smart enough" (which applies to half by latest polls) are as I said arrogant and xenophobic. Perhaps you would apply the same comments to near identical proportions of Dutch Spanish and Germans and the majority of the French? ??
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
No doubt Wolfgang Schauble's intervention today, will be dismissed be Leavers as an irrelevant interjection "by a bloody German!", but there were two points of note, for me.
Firstly, he has made it clear that there will be NO access to the single-market for the UK, following a Leave vote. And whilst it obviously wouldn't be his decision alone, lets not kid ourselves on, that he doesn't have clout. This shatters the Leave assumptions on Trade, and their underplaying of the related impact to the economy.
Secondly, he acknowledged the following:
“In response to Brexit, we couldn’t simply call for more integration,” he is quoted as saying. “That would be crude; many would rightfully wonder *whether we politicians still haven’t understood.
“Even in the event that only a small majority of the British voters reject a withdrawal, we would have to see it as a wake-up call and a warning not to continue with business as usual. Either way, we have to take a serious look at reducing bureaucracy in Europe.”
Changing this institution from within is what we should be doing - because the rest of the continent is now ready for it too.
Firstly, he has made it clear that there will be NO access to the single-market for the UK, following a Leave vote. And whilst it obviously wouldn't be his decision alone, lets not kid ourselves on, that he doesn't have clout. This shatters the Leave assumptions on Trade, and their underplaying of the related impact to the economy.
Secondly, he acknowledged the following:
“In response to Brexit, we couldn’t simply call for more integration,” he is quoted as saying. “That would be crude; many would rightfully wonder *whether we politicians still haven’t understood.
“Even in the event that only a small majority of the British voters reject a withdrawal, we would have to see it as a wake-up call and a warning not to continue with business as usual. Either way, we have to take a serious look at reducing bureaucracy in Europe.”
Changing this institution from within is what we should be doing - because the rest of the continent is now ready for it too.
Last edited:
"No" access to the market? Complete trade embargo? Nice one because we are their third biggest market.
Absolute crap. That has to be mistranslated. Simply cannot state that because of WTO for a start.
trade is a complete non issue. Two states that the eu has not completed trade agreements with
North Korea and Congo? You may think
no
china and the USA..
The rest of his comments are what we want to hear. Good stuff. I think there is a growing awareness that the uk is perhaps acting as the vanguard for overdue reform
Absolute crap. That has to be mistranslated. Simply cannot state that because of WTO for a start.
trade is a complete non issue. Two states that the eu has not completed trade agreements with
North Korea and Congo? You may think
no
china and the USA..
The rest of his comments are what we want to hear. Good stuff. I think there is a growing awareness that the uk is perhaps acting as the vanguard for overdue reform
Last edited:
It's does seem to be what he said. He will be asked to stand up for those comments. Not easy...
I always thought he was fairly together but even the most rabid remain propaganda has not come out with this nonsense
A trade war? No chance but bring it on if you dare
I always thought he was fairly together but even the most rabid remain propaganda has not come out with this nonsense
A trade war? No chance but bring it on if you dare
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
The general thrust of his point was that giving the UK preferential treatment upon Brexit, would embloden other countries to reach for similiar arrangements.....which would threaten the entire European project.
This has always been a potential outcome - despite being constantly rubbished by Leave. Well now we have it presented as bare fact, by one of the EU's most powerful politicians. It will hopefully make people sit up and take notice.
This has always been a potential outcome - despite being constantly rubbished by Leave. Well now we have it presented as bare fact, by one of the EU's most powerful politicians. It will hopefully make people sit up and take notice.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
This is head-in-the-sand stuff.
The damage will already have been done by then; either directly to Trade, or in a wider sense (any uncertainty or perceived downside will see the economy tank).
If you believe this is a bluff, then fair enough.......but Schauble doesn't strike me as the type.
If it isn't a bluff, then it blows an even bigger hole in the Leave campaign, and the nonsense that they perpetuate about there being no penalty/downside attached to Brexit.
The damage will already have been done by then; either directly to Trade, or in a wider sense (any uncertainty or perceived downside will see the economy tank).
If you believe this is a bluff, then fair enough.......but Schauble doesn't strike me as the type.
If it isn't a bluff, then it blows an even bigger hole in the Leave campaign, and the nonsense that they perpetuate about there being no penalty/downside attached to Brexit.
No it isn't. There is no way there Will be a trade embargo. None at all.
i think Airbus for one would be a little bit upset at having to close its production line for years
and if he means we trade in the same basis as every other non eu nation then so be it, it works both ways doesn't it?
the vast bulk of trade is not affected one bit by agreements. It's not as if the ru has difficulty trading with China and the USA is it? And some industries such as steel and fisheries would actually benefit
no no one wants it to come to that because free trade is a strong benefit to both sides. the uk is far too big a market to **** off their industry
i think Airbus for one would be a little bit upset at having to close its production line for years
and if he means we trade in the same basis as every other non eu nation then so be it, it works both ways doesn't it?
the vast bulk of trade is not affected one bit by agreements. It's not as if the ru has difficulty trading with China and the USA is it? And some industries such as steel and fisheries would actually benefit
no no one wants it to come to that because free trade is a strong benefit to both sides. the uk is far too big a market to **** off their industry
Beef or Salmon
Rookie
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2013
- Messages
- 1,024
If nothing else comes of the referendum the last few pages here have been comedy gold 
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
If we vote out can we leave the bankers and the city cunts behind as well.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Clive, Airbus will simply move their operations to the least-resistence jurisdiction i.e. the EU, costing jobs in the UK. And Airbus aren't the only ones.
Some industry insiders suggest that as many as 30,000 FS jobs might go on the back of Brexit. And the much-vaunted 'Commonwealth Alternative' trading proposal, was somewhat torpedoed when trade associations in India and Canada suggested Brexit would likely reduce inward-investment to the UK, rather than increase it.
I make no comment on whether these things will come to pass or not. My perspective is driven by ebtirely by risk - and there are far too many things stacking-up in the 'beyond appetite' column.
Some industry insiders suggest that as many as 30,000 FS jobs might go on the back of Brexit. And the much-vaunted 'Commonwealth Alternative' trading proposal, was somewhat torpedoed when trade associations in India and Canada suggested Brexit would likely reduce inward-investment to the UK, rather than increase it.
I make no comment on whether these things will come to pass or not. My perspective is driven by ebtirely by risk - and there are far too many things stacking-up in the 'beyond appetite' column.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Twelve Nobel Laureate scientists now warning of a funding collapse in the event of Brexit.
Leave apply the same argument here, as they do elsewhere; it's not EU money - it's all funded by the UK taxpayer anyway.........conveniently forgetting that UK Science receives vastly more back (in relative terms) than the UK spends, due to our scientists being world-leaders in many disciplines.
Removal of EU science funding wouldn't directly impact trade per se, but R&D and innovation would be hit, which would have an indirect impact on trade, over the medium/long-term. The potential impact on the Science industry, is self-evident.
This is just another example of the smoke-and-mirror approach to economics used by Leave, and reflective generally of their devil-may-care attitude to this entire process. Every time a risk is raised by Remain, it is dismissed by Leave as scare-mongering. These risks are never tackled head-on by Leave, and a deeper explanation of their position is never offered. It is the biggest stonewalling exercise in history.
Leave apply the same argument here, as they do elsewhere; it's not EU money - it's all funded by the UK taxpayer anyway.........conveniently forgetting that UK Science receives vastly more back (in relative terms) than the UK spends, due to our scientists being world-leaders in many disciplines.
Removal of EU science funding wouldn't directly impact trade per se, but R&D and innovation would be hit, which would have an indirect impact on trade, over the medium/long-term. The potential impact on the Science industry, is self-evident.
This is just another example of the smoke-and-mirror approach to economics used by Leave, and reflective generally of their devil-may-care attitude to this entire process. Every time a risk is raised by Remain, it is dismissed by Leave as scare-mongering. These risks are never tackled head-on by Leave, and a deeper explanation of their position is never offered. It is the biggest stonewalling exercise in history.
Last edited:
bullshit
to move the manufacturer of wings would take years. What they going to do in the meantime . Deliver planes without them?
Last edited:
Of some interest:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36418605
Conservative, Janet Fookes, summarised the problem: "On the doorsteps many people said to me 'First we listen to one side and it seems convincing, then we listen to the other and that seems equally convincing. In the end we are more confused than we were when we began'."
Labour's Willie Hamilton agreed: "People should have the right to say 'We prefer to leave this issue to the judgment of those whom we elected last October.' That is what we are elected for."
a W. D. Bissett called for a "Don't Know" option, saying: "There is something unpleasant and cowardly about shuffling the responsibility for success on the ordinary citizen."
"The current debate has become highly emotional and no one is sufficiently well-informed to decide rationally how to vote," two academics from City University wrote
"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" as they would say somewhere south of the White Cliffs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36418605
Conservative, Janet Fookes, summarised the problem: "On the doorsteps many people said to me 'First we listen to one side and it seems convincing, then we listen to the other and that seems equally convincing. In the end we are more confused than we were when we began'."
Labour's Willie Hamilton agreed: "People should have the right to say 'We prefer to leave this issue to the judgment of those whom we elected last October.' That is what we are elected for."
a W. D. Bissett called for a "Don't Know" option, saying: "There is something unpleasant and cowardly about shuffling the responsibility for success on the ordinary citizen."
"The current debate has become highly emotional and no one is sufficiently well-informed to decide rationally how to vote," two academics from City University wrote
"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" as they would say somewhere south of the White Cliffs