Brexit - Part 3? British elections 2017

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Brexit - Part 3? British elections 2017

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1800938 14-Jun-2017 14:26

Geektastic:

However in the context of the time, nothing was stolen. You cannot apply today's morals to yesterday's actions, otherwise many people in, say, the UK must be owed compensation from the French, the Germans, the Italians and the Scandinavians. People in China are probably owed money in compensation from the Mongolians. How about the poor Hittites, who had their entire nation destroyed?

It all gets a bit silly.

And don't forget: What did the Romans ever do for us?

Mike

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1801009 14-Jun-2017 17:40

MikeAqua:

Geektastic:

However in the context of the time, nothing was stolen. You cannot apply today's morals to yesterday's actions, otherwise many people in, say, the UK must be owed compensation from the French, the Germans, the Italians and the Scandinavians. People in China are probably owed money in compensation from the Mongolians. How about the poor Hittites, who had their entire nation destroyed?

It all gets a bit silly.

And don't forget: What did the Romans ever do for us?

Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, they brought peace.

"Oh. Peace? Shut up!"

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1801047 14-Jun-2017 18:39

Definitely roads. Several of them are still major highways in the UK.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1801051 14-Jun-2017 18:53

Roman numerals for sure. MCMLXX is a much better way of writing my year of birth.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1801084 14-Jun-2017 19:46

DarthKermit:
Roman numerals for sure. MCMLXX is a much better way of writing my year of birth.

Yeah but finding someone who can read it is another problem. As an exercise try doing your cell phone number as well :-)

Regards,

Old3eyes

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1801086 14-Jun-2017 19:53

old3eyes:
DarthKermit:

Roman numerals for sure. MCMLXX is a much better way of writing my year of birth.

Yeah but finding someone who can read it is another problem. As an exercise try doing your cell phone number as well :-)

And when the movie credits come up, that's Speed Roman

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1801135 14-Jun-2017 20:49

Fred99:

frankv:

old3eyes:

He wants to go back to the 1950s and nationalize everything and allow immigration to continue as the rate it was .. Corbyn a self proclaimed Marxist.

You say that like you think it's a bad thing.

Not quite sure how Corbyn's wish to re-nationalise utilities like rail managed to transmorph into nationalise "everything" - but there you go. Probably an example of fake news in action from the ever-hysterical UK tabloids.

The cost of running Britain’s railways has increased by more than £50 billion since the network was privatised, leading to a sharp rise in passenger fares, according to research. A new study said that the “ill-judged” break-up of British Rail two decades ago had created a hugely inefficient and fragmented system that was haemorrhaging money. The research, by academics at the universities of Essex and Queen Mary, claimed that the system had lost money on overly expensive track upgrades, the high cost of leasing trains, the bureaucratic franchise bidding process and profits taken by privately owned operators https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/privatisation-put-50bn-on-cost-of-running-railway-study-claims-v7nvxkrgc

It gets trotted out as a truism that private enterprise is always more efficient than government. That is not true.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1801158 14-Jun-2017 22:20

Geektastic:
The problem is, it is not Macron's decision. He can say what he likes (and knows it) because the Treaty does not say that an Article 50 notice can be rescinded nor does it say that it cannot.

Even if it can, it would require unanimous agreement of all the states of the EU AND would be mired in legal challenges from those who believe that it cannot be rescinded, want to leave and can afford the cost of taking litigation.

Really the Eurozone can make any decision they believe will be in the best interests of the Eurozone. At this point May could actually increase her popularity by holding a second referendum. It's unlikely but it could work for someone.

Lastly UK can always reapply to join. The price of membership is likely to be higher in that case.

The Eurozone seems very unwilling to give any kind of soft exit. Now it depends how much individual nations will bend EU rules to make agreements with UK. Potentially it can start to break the EU. France will be a keystone for that.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1801164 14-Jun-2017 22:46

gzt:
Geektastic:

The problem is, it is not Macron's decision. He can say what he likes (and knows it) because the Treaty does not say that an Article 50 notice can be rescinded nor does it say that it cannot.

Even if it can, it would require unanimous agreement of all the states of the EU AND would be mired in legal challenges from those who believe that it cannot be rescinded, want to leave and can afford the cost of taking litigation.

Really the Eurozone can make any decision they believe will be in the best interests of the Eurozone. At this point May could actually increase her popularity by holding a second referendum. It's unlikely but it could work for someone.

Lastly UK can always reapply to join. The price of membership is likely to be higher in that case.

The Eurozone seems very unwilling to give any kind of soft exit. Now it depends how much individual nations will bend EU rules to make agreements with UK. Potentially it can start to break the EU. France will be a keystone for that.

That is because there really is no such thing as a 'soft Brexit'.

Since the Eurozone will never compromise on the things most Britains who are against being 'in' dislike the most it will end up being in or out, because the EEA rules (the so-called Norway Option) are pretty much the same as being in, except you have no vote.

The root of the problem is, I think, that Britain was very happy to join what was then known as the Common Market; it was a sensible system intended to help neighbouring countries trade together more easily. If that was still what it was, then I very much doubt we would ever be where we are today. However, over time the EU morphed into a political organisation that quite clearly intended, eventually, to end up with Europe being similar to the USA, with Britain, France, Germany and so on taking the position of States governed on a Federal/State basis. At no stage were the British public ever briefed on that and asked whether that was what they wanted.

It is that which I think is anathema to the British character, in the same way that, say, suggesting New Zealand should be a State of Australia would be to Kiwis.

I think most British people's 'ideal' Brexit would be, in effect, a modernised Common Market. Unfortunately, that is not what the Grey Men of Brussels want to allow, because they are afraid that if that happens for Britain, a number of other countries might say "Hang on - I like the look of that!" and then the whole unification agenda is dead in the water.

The principle reason the UK would be decidedly unwilling to reapply for membership later is that a requirement of that would be to replace Sterling with the Euro and that, I think, would be a step few Britains would be keen on when push came to shove.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1801178 14-Jun-2017 23:56

MikeB4:

Tax rates should be fair, the fairest tax rate is a flat rate say 30% for all or consumption taxation as opposed to earnings/asset based.

An assertion isn't an argument. The impact upon a minimum wage earner of having to pay a flat rate of 30% is much more significant than if some guy who is on a million bucks a year gets taxed 300K. Any fair-minded person can see that. Now you can argue that notwithstanding this, such an approach is still fair but then you would have to argue against, for example, the likes of a Rawlsian original position (you can Google what this is for yourself).

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1801204 15-Jun-2017 07:00

Fred99:

Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, they brought peace.

And pizza.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1801259 15-Jun-2017 09:04

Geektastic:

gzt:
Geektastic:

The problem is, it is not Macron's decision. He can say what he likes (and knows it) because the Treaty does not say that an Article 50 notice can be rescinded nor does it say that it cannot.

Even if it can, it would require unanimous agreement of all the states of the EU AND would be mired in legal challenges from those who believe that it cannot be rescinded, want to leave and can afford the cost of taking litigation.

Really the Eurozone can make any decision they believe will be in the best interests of the Eurozone. At this point May could actually increase her popularity by holding a second referendum. It's unlikely but it could work for someone.

Lastly UK can always reapply to join. The price of membership is likely to be higher in that case.

The Eurozone seems very unwilling to give any kind of soft exit. Now it depends how much individual nations will bend EU rules to make agreements with UK. Potentially it can start to break the EU. France will be a keystone for that.

That is because there really is no such thing as a 'soft Brexit'.

Since the Eurozone will never compromise on the things most Britains who are against being 'in' dislike the most it will end up being in or out, because the EEA rules (the so-called Norway Option) are pretty much the same as being in, except you have no vote.

The root of the problem is, I think, that Britain was very happy to join what was then known as the Common Market; it was a sensible system intended to help neighbouring countries trade together more easily. If that was still what it was, then I very much doubt we would ever be where we are today. However, over time the EU morphed into a political organisation that quite clearly intended, eventually, to end up with Europe being similar to the USA, with Britain, France, Germany and so on taking the position of States governed on a Federal/State basis. At no stage were the British public ever briefed on that and asked whether that was what they wanted.

It is that which I think is anathema to the British character, in the same way that, say, suggesting New Zealand should be a State of Australia would be to Kiwis.

I think most British people's 'ideal' Brexit would be, in effect, a modernised Common Market. Unfortunately, that is not what the Grey Men of Brussels want to allow, because they are afraid that if that happens for Britain, a number of other countries might say "Hang on - I like the look of that!" and then the whole unification agenda is dead in the water.

The principle reason the UK would be decidedly unwilling to reapply for membership later is that a requirement of that would be to replace Sterling with the Euro and that, I think, would be a step few Britains would be keen on when push came to shove.

I agree 100% with everything you say.

The Maastrict Agreement in the 1990's fundamentally changed the EU from a trading bloc into a political bloc. There was no referendum offered because the politicians of the time knew that it would be rejected.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1801312 15-Jun-2017 10:47

SJB:

I agree 100% with everything you say.

The Maastrict Agreement in the 1990's fundamentally changed the EU from a trading bloc into a political bloc. There was no referendum offered because the politicians of the time knew that it would be rejected.

How do you know that? I lived there at the time and I did not have that sense.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1801320 15-Jun-2017 10:57

I lived there at the time and that was the feeling amongst all the people I knew.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1801475 15-Jun-2017 12:19

We must have moved in different circles. Many Europeans still remembered past wars and welcomed efforts to bring European countries closer together and make them more interdependent. Some had doubts about the single currency but open borders between European countries were generally welcomed.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10