Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Herzlos wrote:
DINLT - what the gak were you expecting to happen?

Oh that was irrelevant. As far as him is concerned UK, hell even entire world, can burn as long as UK leaves EU. Armageddon is fair price to pay for that for him. If entire human race has to go extinct for UK to leave EU then he's the first one to press the button.

That is the truth and that is the great pity of it all.

Back in the 1990s the UK could have been Top Nation of the EU like a boss, while the Germans were busy trying to integrate East Germany back into a united nation, Poland was trying to get in and loved the UK, and we had the enthusiastic support of the Scandis and Dutch.

We pissed it away with whining about bendy banana bans and other made up stuff.

Cool Britannia?

Fool Britannia more like...

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That is the truth and that is the great pity of it all.

Back in the 1990s the UK could have been Top Nation of the EU like a boss, while the Germans were busy trying to integrate East Germany back into a united nation, Poland was trying to get in and loved the UK, and we had the enthusiastic support of the Scandis and Dutch.

We pissed it away with whining about bendy banana bans and other made up stuff.

Cool Britannia?

Fool Britannia more like...

Yeah, even I have to concede that. Britain won the war but well and truly lost the peace...

Britain could have been the driving, beating heart of the European project...

We never took it seriously, and spent our time hanging onto America's coat tails and spouting bollocks about the special relationship...

You were surprised that a party headed up by Cameron resulted in Brecit being handled by Cameron?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
DINLT - what the gak were you expecting to happen?

As a student of British history, I really thought that our current politicians would follow the example of our forefathers and try their best for the nation in such a moment of national importance.

Pull out all the stops, work around the clock, put the country before party interest etc etc

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha....That was a joke right...

What a sorry mess this all is. It's just a shame I don't have close enough Irish ancestory.

So, some Jewish groups are saying that the conservatives have a problem with Islamophobia.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-islamophobia-inquiry-theresa-may-investigation-jewish-jcore-ujs-mcb-a8386086.html

Someday the press wing of the tory party may notice this. Still a deafening silence everywhere though.

The real villain in all this is the British establishment, who fethed everything up from day one. Not just from the referendum, but from 1992. Cow that she was, at least Maggie could play the game. Repeatedly bungling everything, selling off all of our fishing rights, not putting controls in place after the eastern block countries joined up, being underhanded about the Lisbon treaty, and the threat of the euro hanging over us. In the end I couldn’t trust them with the eu anymore.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Dutch as well. With Roterdam, we could have lob the Dutch some cash for their upgrades to the port...

This wouldn't have worked. The Netherlands is going to be quite negatively affected by the UK leaving. Throwing money at one of the most developed ports in the world wasn't going to make us any friendlier when you're directly endangering a chunk of trade Rotterdam relies on. The overwhelming opinion here is that Brexit is a bad thing for us, why would we want to help you accomplish that? As a transit trade nation, its not in our interest to make it easy on people leaving what is one of the best systems for our economy

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Dutch as well. With Roterdam, we could have lob the Dutch some cash for their upgrades to the port...

This wouldn't have worked. The Netherlands is going to be quite negatively affected by the UK leaving. Throwing money at one of the most developed ports in the world wasn't going to make us any friendlier when you're directly endangering a chunk of trade Rotterdam relies on. The overwhelming opinion here is that Brexit is a bad thing for us, why would we want to help you accomplish that? As a transit trade nation, its not in our interest to make it easy on people leaving what is one of the best systems for our economy

Because if we're doing it anyway and you're going to suffer for it, taking our cash to upgrade your ports further might at least help mitigate the damage?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Dutch as well. With Roterdam, we could have lob the Dutch some cash for their upgrades to the port...

This wouldn't have worked. The Netherlands is going to be quite negatively affected by the UK leaving. Throwing money at one of the most developed ports in the world wasn't going to make us any friendlier when you're directly endangering a chunk of trade Rotterdam relies on. The overwhelming opinion here is that Brexit is a bad thing for us, why would we want to help you accomplish that? As a transit trade nation, its not in our interest to make it easy on people leaving what is one of the best systems for our economy

Because if we're doing it anyway and you're going to suffer for it, taking our cash to upgrade your ports further might at least help mitigate the damage?

Because if you're doing it anyway making it as hard as possible so that others don't leave the system that is very beneficial to our economy is much better. Its nice if you want to pay for Rotterdam, but if everyone is going to leave the EU on good conditions we're left as a tiny country with an oversized port. The UK being in the EU already pays for Rotterdam through trade moving through there. We would be shooting ourselves in the foot long term.

Rotterdam could still ask the UK to fork out for another expansion in order to store the queuing trucks due to the Brexit delays.

Bribing individual countries won't work. The 27 have been far more unified than we expected and we keep getting stonewalled.

As soon as we triggered A50 we should have started building a port big enough to take the big Chinese ships we need to rely on Rotterdam for. We could do with that anyway and It'd save us being completely screwed over.

Herzlos wrote:
Rotterdam could still ask the UK to fork out for another expansion in order to store the queuing trucks due to the Brexit delays.

Well they are either going to do just that or block all trafic toward UK if it hurts them. Which ever hurts Rotterdam least. If that is way that hurts UK most...Well that's too bad.

Herzlos wrote:
Rotterdam could still ask the UK to fork out for another expansion in order to store the queuing trucks due to the Brexit delays.

Bribing individual countries won't work. The 27 have been far more unified than we expected and we keep getting stonewalled.

As soon as we triggered A50 we should have started building a port big enough to take the big Chinese ships we need to rely on Rotterdam for. We could do with that anyway and It'd save us being completely screwed over.

But its easier for Rotterdam to play hardball as the main port for the UK to the outside world. Insisting on the European freedom of movement and really holding to that stance might see the UK blink in the end. Besides, forking out for a parking lot is peanuts

Fully tarmac over a percentage of all the Leave-supporting counties/constituencies down there equal to the Leave vote percentage and let the lorries park there.

 Riquende wrote:
Fully tarmac over a percentage of all the Leave-supporting counties/constituencies down there equal to the Leave vote percentage and let the lorries park there.

You'd need to get them through the border first :(

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_1#/survey/ea30cfa2-6a2d-11e8-b423-d74e00ea34be/question/75c67445-6a2e-11e8-9d33-9d5c8eb86689/politics

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The USA is shaping the IT future with Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple etc etc and you see how rich and powerful and influential these companies are.

The problem with all of these are that they have become household names because the US's capitalist culture significantly favours larger companies whereas Europe is by far more socialist. The latter tends to mean the population are exploited 'less'. For example the Google / Facebook/ Apples etc all require intense energy requirements to support the server infrastructure. In the US they can exploit the low cost of energy (regardless of the environmental consequences) that Europe simply wouldn't accommodate. Amazon and Apple exploit low skilled labour for retail/manufacturing the former selling cheap and en-masse, the latter at stupidly high prices manufactured in slave sweat shops. However I'd note that I think Apple is a bubble that will burst. I think they are an over-hyped company.

However, back to topic, the EU does have world famous companies but they are less day to day household names (though some are) because they are more specialised. Companies like Airbus, Rolls-Royce, GlaxoKleinSmith, Unilever, VW, Shell, Daimler, BP, Nestle and so forth.

Just because they are closer to home for me; Novozymes and Vestas are European companies.
If your first instinct is to say; "Who?", you are making Whirlwind's point.

They are the world's leading companies in industrial enzymes and wind turbines respectively.

Maersk is the world's leading sea shipment company -- from Norway!

We have Mammoet, Dutch, leading company in lifting superheavy material. Best know for raising the Kursk I assume. Boskalis, world leader in dredging and maretime infrastructure. In general the Netherlands is a leading nation in the development of water management/defences, something that is becoming ever more relevant with climate change. Having an IT future is nice and all, but it helps if that IT future isn't standing in 6 feet of water.

Heh. Is this even satire any more? I can't tell...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/only-17-massive-new-problems-with-brexit-discovered-today-20180605173869

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maersk is the world's leading sea shipment company -- from Norway!

From Denmark, but your point still stands.

Mrs Mays brilliantly conceived and executed General Election was 1 year ago today.

1 year on - backstops, 'meltdown', possible food and fuel shortages in the event of no deal. And of course the risks for NI and Ireland in whatever follows.

I could just laugh long and hard at what Britain is becoming(we've spent the last 40 years throwing billions at non-doms to tell us how awful foreigners are, we deserve it), except I have kids. Any of the Brexiteers on here parents, and still believe the next decade or two of their children's lives are going to be improved by all this?

Not a Brexiteer, but very concerned for my sisters kids. They have a bit of a varied age range, but I think their future is going to be made a damn site tougher going forward. Personally speaking, I'm moving to Norway with my fiancé in the next six months or so, so all I can do now is watch from over the horizon.

Speaking of US companies being the 'future'. Anyone see the new Amazon Germany scandal? In a nutshell, Amazon DE justt destroys items that are being returned on a massive scale. Even functioning brand new electronics and furniture. Its reported that its destroying tens of thousands of euros in product every day. Just thought it was funny to mention in the context of the recent discussion.

reds8n - that's quite some poll. The Labour figures in particular make it bewildering that they haven't been substantially more pro-remain.

Yes indeed.

It's not the first bit of evidence that Labour could do very well by declaring a strong soft-Brexit stance.

I think Corbyn is the problem. He's always been a bit of a Euro-sceptic and seems to indentify the EU as a mechanism of corporatism and capitalism when actually it consists of far more socialist nations than any other organisation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've been thinking about it and I've come to the conclusion that the best compromise is the Norway model (EFTA).

However it depends on your main concern -- sovereignty or economic factors.

The plusses of the Norway model are economic:

Full access to EU market and trade deals done by the EU.
Ability to create separate trade deals with third party countries.
The NI border could be kept almost frictionless. (This is political.)

The minusses are about sovereignty:

Still subject to ECJ
Freedom of movement (though we can put more restrictions and conditions on EU citizens than we have done so far. We can also do this even if we stay in the EU.)
A rule-taker not a rule-maker (though we would have the right to consultation and some degree of veto over proposals for changes.)

Personally I am not very concerned about the theoretical matter of sovereignty. I regard it as a tool to be used or not depending on how useful it may be for your national purposes.

It's interesting that once you scratch the surface about the positives of the EU, and Europe in general, there are a number of areas the bloc is a world leader in. You never read that in a news headline, which is perhaps where we've been going wrong in the past. America and Asia catch the eye of the superficial because the papers are full of stories on Amazon and Google and steel production, but rarely about cutting edge renewables and other industries which we dont necessarily have direct contact with. It's hard to relate to a world leading dredging company, when you have a flashy app for your phone, especially if it's never mentioned.
It's a shame that we seem to have been afflicted with a "grass is greener" outside sort of mentality, without bothering to check if thats really the case.

Hopefully the whole stupid idea will burn itself out, and the Govt will have to admit that they've well and truly fethed this up, and call it all off. Inevitably they'll get destroyed in the next GE, and we have to learn to deal with millions of angry, resentful citizens but that's likely to happen anyway if we crash out.

Basically their choice is get destroyed at the next GE and take the country down with them, or get destroyed at the next GE and the country carries on as it has done for the last 40 years. I have a feeling I know which one they'll choose.

Brexit causes surge in support for united Ireland

Good work, Ulster Unionists, good work indeed!

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes indeed.

It's not the first bit of evidence that Labour could do very well by declaring a strong soft-Brexit stance.

I think Corbyn is the problem. He's always been a bit of a Euro-sceptic and seems to indentify the EU as a mechanism of corporatism and capitalism when actually it consists of far more socialist nations than any other organisation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've been thinking about it and I've come to the conclusion that the best compromise is the Norway model (EFTA).

However it depends on your main concern -- sovereignty or economic factors.

The plusses of the Norway model are economic:

Full access to EU market and trade deals done by the EU.
Ability to create separate trade deals with third party countries.
The NI border could be kept almost frictionless. (This is political.)

The minusses are about sovereignty:

Still subject to ECJ
Freedom of movement (though we can put more restrictions and conditions on EU citizens than we have done so far. We can also do this even if we stay in the EU.)
A rule-taker not a rule-maker (though we would have the right to consultation and some degree of veto over proposals for changes.)

Personally I am not very concerned about the theoretical matter of sovereignty. I regard it as a tool to be used or not depending on how useful it may be for your national purposes.

EFTA buddies!

All this time I had in my mind an idea of what I’d like our relationship with Europe to be; with it but not ‘in’ it. And efta is pretty much that. I’ll say this again, but initially I dismissed it because I thought it was ‘governed by fax’ but after researching it I realised this isn’t strictly true. Even my brother has now enthusiastically came around to the idea of re joining EFTA (we’re slowly rebuilding our relationship).

We should have prepared for this much sooner, and worked with the others (Norway etc.) but nearly 2 years has been squandered.

I think the EU 27 would rather have the UK in EFTA than farther away, and so fast-track entry could be arranged, especially with the close alignment period from April 2019 to Dec 2020 giving extra time to complete any necessary adjustments.

The political problem with this idea is that neither the government nor the Labour Party are up for it, however much of the UK population might vote for it.