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.
Sensible? Even Willy Wonka couldn't come up with as much fudge as May's speech. It's the worst kind of half-way house approach I have ever seen. The transition period is all the drawbacks of EU membership (ECJ, open door borders to EU citizens etc etc ) whilst gaining no advantages. And we're paying for it.
The return is that we don't throw the economy into tilt and everyone (on both sides) acquires the time needed to craft an agreement which works for both sides. Something which was a rapidly diminishing possibility under the current circumstances. Maintaining payments and the existing system for a few extra years is a perfectly reasonable and sensible thing to do if that is the payoff.
Not everything is about 'advantage'. This isn't a zero sum game. Everyone loses if that's the way the game is played.
Sensible? Even Willy Wonka couldn't come up with as much fudge as May's speech. It's the worst kind of half-way house approach I have ever seen. The transition period is all the drawbacks of EU membership (ECJ, open door borders to EU citizens etc etc ) whilst gaining no advantages. And we're paying for it.
The return is that we don't throw the economy into tilt and everyone (on both sides) acquires the time needed to craft an agreement which works for both sides. Something which was a rapidly diminishing possibility under the current circumstances. Maintaining payments and the existing system for a few extra years is a perfectly reasonable and sensible thing to do if that is the payoff.
Not everything is about 'advantage'. This isn't a zero sum game. Everyone loses if that's the way the game is played.
The problem with any transition period though is that a presents an opportunity for any future Remain leaning government to keep kicking the issue into the long grass, so we exit the EU in name only, and the transition goes on for years. Even if you gave business 100 years to get ready, they'd still moan about needing more time.
More importantly, if we abide by EU rules during the transition period, that presumably means the rule on not being able to negotiate separate trade deals with the rest of the world still holds...
I would assume that the government was aware of the possibility of that before May's speech, but Tory incompetence knows no bounds, so I wouldn't be surprised if they overlooked that.
We desperately need clarification on that. As much as I loathe Liam Fox, it would be pointless to have his department doing nothing until 2021.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
#Greece poll [Metron Analysis/@ta_nea]:
Remain in the Eurozone 75%
Drachma 19%
NA 6%
Now that is, of course, only 1 poll -- sample etc etc usual issues etc etc -- but that's both Frexit and Grexit well and truly gone post Brexit, which is odd as I was told over and over again there was no future in the Eu, it was all falling apart, countries were getting ready to leave and so forth.
Yet, weirdly like the actual facts of the Brexit debate, it seems the opposite is true.
The day before, astonished journalists, who had not applied to accompany Mays to Italy, were informed that they were accredited to Florence, a little reminiscent of winning a lottery in which they had not played. Apparently, the government quarter was concerned that May must hold her hopeful historical speech before empty benches; European politicians of rank had canceled. After all, tourists found the Bohei very exciting.
Well received then.
Extra press passes given out after the European politicians of note didn't bother turning up.
Least the British press pack was there -- it's nice travelling around without visas eh ?
Around 10,000 EU nationals have quit the NHS since the Brexit referendum, it has emerged.
NHS Digital, the agency that collects data on the health service, found that in the 12 months to June, 9,832 EU doctors, nurses and support staff had left, with more believed to have followed in the past three months.
This is an increase of 22% on the previous year and up 42% on two years previously. Among those from the EU who left the NHS between June 2016 and June 2017 were 3,885 nurses and 1,794 doctors.
Hope those blue passports are also anti-bacterial.
After all it's well known that nothing gets "yoof" involved in politics like bales of hay .../
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
With regards to that poll about Greece and the EU.
Never will you see a clearer example of Stockholm Syndrome for as long as you live. It's almost a dictionary definition. Textbook.
I'm running out of clichés.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The problem with any transition period though is that a presents an opportunity for any future Remain leaning government to keep kicking the issue into the long grass, so we exit the EU in name only, and the transition goes on for years. Even if you gave business 100 years to get ready, they'd still moan about needing more time.
More importantly, if we abide by EU rules during the transition period, that presumably means the rule on not being able to negotiate separate trade deals with the rest of the world still holds...
The world will wait. Time ticks on. We do a sufficiently large amount of business with the EU that it would be foolish to rush things if there is an alternative. Given that Corbyn sitting in the wings has always disliked the EU, May won't change her course, and the Lib dems are down to a handful of seats, fears of some sort of political coup to keep us in the EU are somewhat groundless at this stage.
reds8n wrote:
It's pretty fething sad when a person accepting the inevitable is somehow lauded as being a worthy accomplishment.
Never said it was an accomplishment. Just that it was a statement to be welcomed. Which it is. If things had been conducted properly from the word go, it might have been unnecessary, but the Tories playing leader charades stuffed that one up.
With regards to that poll about Greece and the EU.
Never will you see a clearer example of Stockholm Syndrome for as long as you live. It's almost a dictionary definition. Textbook.
I'm running out of clichés.
... might wanna have a reread of your comments about how easy, great etc etc Brexit is gonna be.
The cult like beliefs of the pro bexit crowd from the other view are...well...
.. well... probably as baffling as the remain camp arguments from the pro-brexit POV in all honesty
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I'm well aware of badly the Tories are fething up Brexit.
That doesn't make Brexit a bad idea, just because the execution of it hasn't been good. I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow.
It's like saying you wouldn't abandon a sinking ship because you didn't like the colour of the lifeboats.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
It's more like saying that without any actual coherent plan or idea of what to do or how to improve things, then it's a bad idea to mess up what has been working well enough thus far.
But this has been explained over and over to you so what's the point eh ?
Merkel's conservatives see slim chance of Brexit progress by October
BERLIN (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech in Florence has failed to inject much-needed new momentum into talks on Britain’s departure from the European Union, a top politician with German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives said on Saturday.
May set out a plan on Friday to retain full access to the EU’s single market for two years after Brexit to try to reassure business and reset the tone of stalled negotiations with Brussels.
Michael Stuebgen, European spokesman for the conservatives in the German parliament, said it remained unclear how Britain would meet its financial obligations under the EU budget, and that London continued to refuse Britons living in Europe access to the European Court of Justice.
“Theresa May’s speech underscores the will of London to move ahead with Brexit negotiations, but unfortunately it will not provide a new dynamism in the talks that is so urgently needed,” Stuebgen said in a statement.
He said May also failed to address the issue of future borders, especially in Ireland.
“On this basis, we can hardly expect the needed progress in the Brexit negotiations before the European Council meeting in October,” he said.
German government spokesman Steffen Seibert declined to comment after May’s speech.
On Friday, before May spoke, Seibert told reporters a new round of negotiations due to start on Monday offered Britain a “fourth opportunity” to discuss specific proposals, reflecting growing impatience with the lack of progress in the talks.
The head of the German Association of Small and Medium-sized Businesses (BVMW) called May’s speech disappointing and said she had wasted an opportunity for a new beginning in the Brexit negotiations.
“What German industry needs above all is planning and investment certainty,” BVMW chief Mario Ohoven said in a statement. “Looming customs duties and bureaucratic trade obstacles are exactly the opposite of that, and are already resulting in significant damage to the investment climate.”
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
This is a positive sign for the negotiations ahead. Even the EU has officially recognised that 'six months after the triggering of article 50, it appears that the position of the UK is becoming more realistic' (Guy Verhofstadt yesterday). The European side has also begun to outline what they are after (namely an association agreement) and hinted at their preference potentially being to keep Northern Ireland specifically inside the Customs Union. These are good indications for a starting point for the diplomatic wrangling.
Things are actually beginning to progress. It is a good sign.
Although noting that he stated 'more realistic' not 'is realistic'. Perhaps he was just referring to the point that the UK government has conceded that they can't just implement this quickly and easily and an extension for the homework is necessary (of course it doesn't help that May lost 6 months because of her own idiocy). So there is still some way to go before the EU agrees. He has also come out and flatly stated that registering new EU migrants during the approximate two year transitional deal is not acceptable. Of course it depends on what May means - if it is that workers need an NI number well they have to have that anyway. On the other hand if it means taking a blood, semen, boot crack swab and having a mug shot taken (more likely given May's preference) then they just aren't going to go with it.
Generally though the speech was pretty light on details, with little actual substance. She wanted to use this speech to unblock the talks but did not deal with any of the major issues from our side such as the final bill (noting that the money to the EU is just funding to keep existing arrangements). Nor is there anything on the Irish border and freedom of movement. The EU have a position on such things already
However there was some things to note. She is committing now to mirroring EU legislation in UK legislation and rather than have the ECJ have oversight she wants 'another' body to deal with any discrepancies. In effect she wants and Extra - ECJ (EECJ) to take on oversight on any disputes. Our own courts will also have to take into consideration ECJ rulings. This seems rather pointless to be honest. We would be better staying in the ECJ and the EU legislative process to try and influence there. In effect we will comply with EU rules anyway. It also means that any trade deals we make will also have to comply with the EU rules meaning that any new trade deals will effectively be EU trade deals. This all means that she is heading for a direction where we comply but have no influence. In this case the question is why are we leaving in the first place.
And maybe this is where she is moving towards - a transition period could just as easily be used to return to the EU. There is a significant shift now away from leaving the EU. More polls are showing people not wanting to leave. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-majority-uk-british-people-stay-in-eu-not-leave-latest-poll-theresa-may-florence-speech-tory-a7960226.html. Although the change is not huge there is a definitive move away from leaving the EU. It's still not a huge majority, but it does show the general trend. People are starting to realise the full impacts, farmers are questioning where the subsidies are going to come from that will keep them competitive and so on. The young vote has suddenly found its voice (and noting they are trying to attract new voters from that age group and they are hardly going to do that whilst aiming to Wrexit). As such May might be in a position at the next election now when she has just implemented something the majority of people no longer want (as well as recognising that 2-3 million additional people will then be eligible to vote given current proposals who are highly unlikely to want to not rejoin the EU). I think May is highly likely to know this and is trying to find a fine line between keeping the party together and not condemning the Tory party for decades.
The real issue for May is her fascination with the anti-immigration agenda. She can't have both, where she states she is welcoming of all the work they are doing (paraphrased from her own speech) because there is growing recognition that a lot of jobs simply won't be done with out immigration but at the same time trying to pacify those that see people differently simply based on that they are not from the UK.
Take the victories where you can...however I'd note that unfortunately there is a human trait that when presented with absolute evidence that a belief is wrong that they will double down on that belief even harder. It's not entirely clear why we have this trait or stubbornness as it were, but perhaps a general unwillingness of humans to accept they are wrong.
What will be interesting will be whether the EU accepts May's 'generous offer' as by my calculations what the suggested amount is a less than the current payments yet we want to keep all the same things during the transition period. I question whether the EU will actually accept this (or whether they will restrict it to freedom of movement/free trade) and everything else is lost (so research grants etc).
It's like saying you wouldn't abandon a sinking ship because you didn't like the colour of the lifeboats.
The EU is not a sinking ship, if anything this is making them stronger because it shows what happens when you let populists get out of hand. Everyone in the world can see how badly it is going and the damage political decisions can do to a country.
A better analogy would be that we joined a high quality cruise liner but found there were too many tourists that weren't Brits onboard and that it couldn't be a Brit at the helm. Hence we decided that we'd make our own instead knotting together a few bits of rotten flotsam together and trying to push away blindly whilst everyone left on the cruise ship is pointing out the vessel we have designed is hardly sea worthy and is taking on water at a rapid rate. I think we are now at the point when we've travelled a few hundred metres and the crew have realised that we really are shipping a lot of water but the helms people are stating "its fine, it's only a bit of water"!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/09/23 12:47:11
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
The EU is not a sinking ship, if anything this is making them stronger because it shows what happens when you let populists get out of hand. Everyone in the world can see how badly it is going and the damage political decisions can do to a country.!
So populist is bad....... oh wait isnt that democracy who ever is the most popular wins...
So your against the people who pay politicos to do a job actually doing as there told.
So ultimately your against democracy no wonder you like the eeeeeuuuuu.
jhe90 wrote:Will May do her damned job and get us out of that giant monolithic octopus of waste, frivolous spending, tinpot junkers and damned merkin run German empire.
We voted to leave.
May. Your job is to leave.
Giant monolithic octopus of waste, really? What's next? Get out of the giant monolithic octopus of waste that's the UK, then England,…, and so on until you arrive at a sufficiently small, direct, and efficient level and method of government like a city, town, or neighbourhood? The EU does good and bad like any other government agency and (in my opinion) it's overall more good than bad. But if you really think they are the big bad who's controlling everything and causing misery in your hometown then lets see who you'll blame for the same problems once the UK is out of the EU.
So populist is bad....... oh wait isnt that democracy who ever is the most popular wins...
So your against the people who pay politicos to do a job actually doing as there told.
So ultimately your against democracy no wonder you like the eeeeeuuuuu.
It can be bad. If you just act reactionary to anything you perceive as being what the people want you might end up offering your voters a non-binging and vague referendum just to claw back a few votes from the far right party and then later resign when things end up more complicated than expected. Of course somebody then May have to deal with a whole mess of uncertainty, vague promises, and lies that were left behind to make things work somehow. It's not like everybody has the competence to make good choices. Trickle down economics have been shown to not work that well but for some reason people can still be convinced to vote against their own interests and put people in power who keep cutting taxes for the rich while apologising that there's no money for better social services but the economic benefits from the tax cuts will totally fix all the problems (I'm not singling out the UK here, that's a pattern in quite a few first world countries).
Just because you don't pay attention to the EU doesn't mean elections don't happen. That's be like me saying that China doesn't exist because I've never been there and that would be an equally absurd statement. Here's a quote about the European Parliament from wikipeida:
The European Parliament (EP) is the directly elected parliamentary institution of the European Union (EU). Together with the Council of the European Union (the Council) and the European Commission, it exercises the legislative function of the EU. The Parliament is composed of 751 members, who represent the second-largest democratic electorate in the world (after the Parliament of India) and the largest trans-national democratic electorate in the world (375 million eligible voters in 2009).
Of course people find things to disagree with the process or with the distribution of power but it's not that undemocratic in my opinion. And if the EU system is such a big problem then voting on the national level must be nearly equally infuriating for you. It's just like one level of abstraction closer to you, after all.
Mario wrote: Giant monolithic octopus of waste, really?
I think it's quite well established that if national governments are leaky buckets when it comes to finance, the EU is a bucket without a bottom. There's very little oversight of spending, and that's generally admitted and known within the EU itself.
I would challenge any Brexiteer to look me in the eye and tell me hand on heart do you really believe that, right now, as we stand our country is better off? Do you really think this vast amount of time, money and effort wouldn't be better spent dealing with the substantial issues in this country.
With problems like wage stagnation, housing shortages, failing public services and a stuttering economy, is this ridiculousness really the top priority for our politicians, civil service and media?
We can always deal with those issues, but getting out of the EU was now or never. There was never going to be an opportune time to do it. You just had to do it before it became impossible. Juncker's speech made it clear that the status quo was never an option, that it was always going to be more integration.
It's also a pity May had to go and feth it all up by blinking first.
Exactly. After Juncker's speech the other day on the United States of Europe, it amazes me that support for Brexit isn't at the 95% mark.
What makes you think that some people in the UK wouldn't welcome being part of a federalised state? Just because a third of the population want globalisation to go away and think the best way to do that is to close borders and shun the outside world, doesn't mean that everyone is closed off to a new approach to the modern world.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: ..
I pay no heed to spivs and speculators such as Moody's. At any rate, I thought these bankers were leaving? My offer to drive these to the nearest airport of their choice still stands.
The classy thing for me to do would be to not to point out the correlation between rejection of expert advice and wonky, nationalistic thinking.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other news, 10'000 EU nationals have quit the NHS, and Colin Firth has dual Italian citizenship, and the battle between Boris and Philip Hammond heats up.
I tackled my MP on social media last week after he proudly posted an article about 60 nurses recently recruited for Lincolnshire. There are currently vacancies for over 240, so I asked what the plan was to recruit some more. He had no answer.
Following Colin Firth, I have started the process of obtaining an Irish passport for me and my children in order to ensure that there options are still open for them. I think I'm probably not alone.
Finally, isn't it nice to see the Tory party fighting like cats in a sack. It's almost as if the party of individualism has trouble co-operating on almost all issues.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/24 08:38:21
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
Too many silly analogies, you can't boil down such a complex political-econonic situation into a trite comparison, which only achieves irritating those with a different opinion.
If we're playing silly analogies, how about this one? I'd rather be the master of my own leaking lifeboat than be a passenger on a ship sailing to a destination I don't want to go to.
Well, I'd prefer to get somewhere I don't like much, rather than just drown to be honest.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
I see the Blairites are trying to force Corbyn's hand by getting him to sign up to permanent membership of the single market.
To remain in the single market, but have no say on the rules...
And the Sunday Times is reporting a government source who is saying that the EU is looking for a 50 billion Euro divorce bill
This is what happens when your Prime Minister rolls up the white flag and does a Neville Chamberlain impression.
I warned last year that if the British people thought that they were getting stiched up by the Westminster elite, and were being stabbed in the back, there would be trouble...
I don't want trouble, I've never wanted trouble, and I have no doubt that nobody else on dakka would want that either.
But the few of us who comment here don't speak for millions of our fellow countrymen and women.
We've seen Trump, we've seen Farage, but I seriously fear that the backlash could produce something worse
Some sections of British society may wonder why we even bother voting anymore...
The rest of us might not like the answer...
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
So populist is bad....... oh wait isnt that democracy who ever is the most popular wins...
So your against the people who pay politicos to do a job actually doing as there told.
So ultimately your against democracy no wonder you like the eeeeeuuuuu.
It is because populists respond and reinforce the anecdotal beliefs of society as whole rather than look at the real issues. As a populace as a whole humans can pretty stupid. Once a view has become ingrained in the psyche that 'feels right' it can end up with a life of its own. The majority of us at some time act like cattle following the herd as it makes makes us feel comfortable and part of a community. A lot of all these are also based on our fear response which further encourages us not to stray from the herd. The problem is that this can generate urban myths with little (if any) actual scientific evidence to support this. Populists then use these feelings to drive what they want. They reinforce the misconceptions and myths which further reinforces the groups view that it is correct. There are plenty of examples with Wrexit (from both sides).
For example their is a myth that EU immigration has depressed wages. There is little to no evidence that this has actually happened. The Bank of England's report suggests perhaps the lowest paid workers might be 1-2p per *year* worse off (which is negligible when compared to inflation). Other reports indicate, which we have discussed before, show no significant changes, though they do show that some wealthier groups do benefit slightly. If Cable is correct there are even more reports that May has suppressed whilst in the Home Office. It is an easy 'answer' to peoples problems however, it allows blame to be placed to the "its not our fault we are in this position today its because of something I have no control over". As individuals we then find evidence that this is correct and ignore that might challenge it. Bob the Joiner sees the EU citizen doing work cheaper than he is, but it is anecdotal - it ignore that Ahmed from Scotland, Jill from NI, and Jack from Birmingham, all UK citizens are also cheaper.
Populists tap into these misconceptions and then tout easy solutions (e.g. closed borders) whilst the reality is much wider and broader. The lack of provision for training/apprenticeships to provide a wider skill set for the populace, that we are in a globalised world and the rates paid are what has to be to ensure that items can't simply be manufactured abroad and shipped in and so on. MPs are voted in to act on the best interests of our behalf, not to just implement what the populace wants (otherwise we'd have 200mph speed limits). This is why they also don't like to here from people that have actual evidence. You can see this in the Wrexit campaign. There was a deliberate attempt to denigrate people that had actual evidence "we've had enough of expert" for example. They can't argue with the facts so rather than try to, they attempt to make people dismiss the evidence. The same thing happens with climate change, Neonictinoids, Edrogan is trying to silence teachers, academics (anyone that might question factually what he is doing) etc. Populists don't want people to listen to the experts simply because it will make some people start to question what is being said and that will then break the herd up and is less controllable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: If we're playing silly analogies, how about this one? I'd rather be the master of my own leaking lifeboat than be a passenger on a ship sailing to a destination I don't want to go to.
I suppose downwards is a direction, but for me its not preferable as I don't have gills. However I'd question anyone that said they knew where any direction will lead to. None of us have crystal balls. All we can do is make predictions based on the evidence to hand.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/24 12:06:15
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Howard A Treesong wrote: Too many silly analogies, you can't boil down such a complex political-econonic situation into a trite comparison, which only achieves irritating those with a different opinion.
It is pretty simple, though, when you think about it.
We voted to leave the EU, so let's leave. All this horsegak about transition periods, cliff edges, single market, customs union, soft Brexit, hard Brexit, is just that: horsegak.
The problems of leaving and the issues to overcome won't be easy, but we know what they are, and they just need to be solved. It's a lack of will and can do attitude. That's the problem.
Our MPs and civil servants have forgotten how to run a country becuase they have been that used to the EU doing everything for them for years.
If we need new trade deals, then go out and get them. If we need more border staff, hire more. If Dover needs new infastructure then build it etc etc
For me, it's as simple as that. The rest is just detail and white noise.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Mario wrote: Giant monolithic octopus of waste, really?
I think it's quite well established that if national governments are leaky buckets when it comes to finance, the EU is a bucket without a bottom. There's very little oversight of spending, and that's generally admitted and known within the EU itself.
That's not entirely correct. The EU do audit there accounts and generally find them to be a fair and accurate representation of their expenditure. They do recognise there are some errors, last time I read approximately 3.8% of expenditure was deemed to have been spent in 'error' (note not as in fraudulently). That amounts to abut £4bn of the budget cannot be correctly accounted for. To put that into context that is about £143m per EU country which is relatively a tiny amount of money (it is less than half of one standard sized County Council's budget for example). The idea that the EU is a leaky bucket is not correct.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Too many silly analogies, you can't boil down such a complex political-econonic situation into a trite comparison, which only achieves irritating those with a different opinion.
It is pretty simple, though, when you think about it.
We voted to leave the EU, so let's leave. All this horsegak about transition periods, cliff edges, single market, customs union, soft Brexit, hard Brexit, is just that: horsegak.
The problems of leaving and the issues to overcome won't be easy, but we know what they are, and they just need to be solved. It's a lack of will and can do attitude. That's the problem.
That's questionable though. The vote was too close and a lot of people were excluded from the vote (for example those demonstrating outside of Florence). It was a non-binding referendum where a significant fraction of the populace of the UK were excluded. The vote was too close to be conclusive either way once you factor into these issues. As I've pointed out May is offering a type of citizenship to 2-3million people that are not UK born but have been living and contributing for many years, these people weren't asked what they wanted. Those mostly affected by Wrexit, the under 18's, were not asked what they wanted (the age limit could easily have been lowered to 16 for example). 30% of the population simply did not vote - however that does not mean they should be ignored. 30% of the population voted to Remain, that does not mean they should be ignored. However this appears to be the view that the whole populace voted for Wrexit which they did not; in fact only a minority actually voted for it when you consider the whole populace.
A can do attitude will only take you so far. I can jump off a building with a 'can do' attitude and willpower that I will float. That doesn't mean the reality is that I end up as a messy puddle at the bottom.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I
I warned last year that if the British people thought that they were getting stiched up by the Westminster elite, and were being stabbed in the back, there would be trouble...
I don't want trouble, I've never wanted trouble, and I have no doubt that nobody else on dakka would want that either.
But the few of us who comment here don't speak for millions of our fellow countrymen and women.
We've seen Trump, we've seen Farage, but I seriously fear that the backlash could produce something worse
Yeah I can see the fear in people's eyes now as the zimmer-frame brigade try and rebel and take over the country using wooden walking sticks as they descend on London. The reality is the vast majority of younger people want to Remain and if any 'backlash' would have to include them to make it active.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/09/24 12:35:19
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Gotta laugh at those who thought Rudd could work as a replacement too -- she barely held onto her own seat !
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
For example their is a myth that EU immigration has depressed wages. There is little to no evidence that this has actually happened.
I'd like to step in there actually, and specify that saying immigration hasn't depressed wages is actually as inaccurate as saying it has.
Both are generalisations about vast numbers of people of various social position and different labour markets. It's a bit like how saying 'those immigrants come and put pressure on our services' is inaccurate if you look at the NHS, but accurate if you look at emergency child fostering/adoption services. You're correct that at the macro 'taking everything into account' level, there's relatively little wage depression, but if you break it down further, it's just not that simple. The inclusion of the middle and upper end of the job market in a generalised analysis distorts the data, as well qualified jobs are rarely subject to the same sort of pressures as the unskilled market (which more people are concerned about when it comes to wage depression from immigration).
If you look purely at the statistical data for low paid jobs, a trend of wage depression linked to higher levels of immigration becomes more apparent. At the same time however, that also harms the wages of other immigrants (because they're also competing for jobs primarily in that area). To pull from Oxford University:-
Spoiler:
Focusing on the period 1997-2005 when the UK experienced significant labour immigration (see our briefing ‘Migrants in the UK Labour Market‘), Dustmann, Frattini and Preston (2013) find that an increase in the number of migrants corresponding to 1% of the UK-born working-age population resulted in an increase in average wages of 0.1 to 0.3%. Another study, for the period 2000-2007, found that a 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK’s working-age population lowers the average wage by 0.3% (Reed and Latorre 2009). These studies, which relate to different time periods, thus reach opposing conclusions but they agree that the effects of immigration on averages wages are relatively small.
The effects of immigration on workers within specific wage ranges or in specific occupations are more significant. The greatest wage effects are found for low-waged workers even though those effects can be considered relatively small. Dustmann et al (2013) find that each 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK-born working age population leads to a 0.6% decline in the wages of the 5% lowest paid workers and to an increase in the wages of higher paid workers. Another study focusing on wage effects at the occupational level during 1992 and 2006, found that, in the unskilled and semi-skilled service sector, a 1% rise in the share of migrants reduced average wages in that occupation by nearly 0.5% (Nickell and Salaheen 2008). They also find the same effect in an updated paper, in which they consider the period from 1992 and 2014, however in this extended period the average wage reduction for the unskilled and semi-skilled service sector is just under 0.2% (Nickell and Salaheen 2015).
The available research further shows that any adverse wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants. This is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers. Manacorda, Manning and Wadsworth (2012) analyse data from 1975-2005 and conclude that the main impact of increased immigration is on the wages of migrants already in the UK.
Ultimately, the people who voted for Brexit are those who are most likely to have been hurt by wage depression from immigration (namely, those who work in low skilled/paid jobs). Not those sitting sweet in academic jobs, medicine, or other fields where the immigrants barely dent the average wage (or even increase it), that a more generalised analysis takes into account. The studies mentioned above are looking at immigration figures at a national level to boot, which means that if you focus the lens further upon the areas with a higher proportion of immigrants per head than the national average, the wage depression will only increase further for those specific areas. If those areas have higher living costs also (say, London for example) that only exacerbates the effect, as your money gets you far less.
The great thing about statistics is that they're only as good as the person who pulls them together. If you cast the statistical net too wide, you raise inaccuracy and distort data, but if you narrow it in too far, you miss extraneous factors.
The idea that the EU is a leaky bucket is not correct.
You've misread. The phrases were 'waste' and 'oversight'. That doesn't mean purely expenditure that can't be traced properly in the accounts (although it includes it, and 3.8% is a terrible figure far in excess of what I expected for that). We're talking about pointless expenditure, wasteful expenditure, unnecessary expenditure. Things like the sorts of subsidies high ranking EU officials get, pet projects that achieve little of worth or meaning, and so on. You couldn't find a single government department in Britain that has the degree of lax sanctioning of expenditure that the EU indulges in. Too much pressure to squeeze the value from every penny on this side, and far too little on the other.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/09/24 14:31:17
Howard A Treesong wrote: Too many silly analogies, you can't boil down such a complex political-econonic situation into a trite comparison, which only achieves irritating those with a different opinion.
It is pretty simple, though, when you think about it.
We voted to leave the EU, so let's leave. All this horsegak about transition periods, cliff edges, single market, customs union, soft Brexit, hard Brexit, is just that: horsegak.
The problems of leaving and the issues to overcome won't be easy, but we know what they are, and they just need to be solved. It's a lack of will and can do attitude. That's the problem.
Our MPs and civil servants have forgotten how to run a country becuase they have been that used to the EU doing everything for them for years.
If we need new trade deals, then go out and get them. If we need more border staff, hire more. If Dover needs new infastructure then build it etc etc
For me, it's as simple as that. The rest is just detail and white noise.
That is one huge attitudinal problem right there, and an example of the blinkerdness of Nationalistic thought process '. The split up of any union is not simple or easy, it cannot possibly be no matter how much you wish it could be. You are dealing with hugely detailed government structures that are not there to just "get in the way" but are essential to the maintenance of society.
Your failure to understand that, or willingness to even try, actually demonstrates that you probably need to take a moment for reflection about your actual beliefs. Because, this demonstrates that you are not thinking rationally about this at all, but are reacting based in opinion, belief and feels.
How on earth do you "just build infrastructure"? If it's that easy, it would have been done, but apart from anything else, money needs to be found and it needs to be planned etc. That takes resources, of which there Is only a finite amount.
You cannot expect to be taken remotely seriously with such a simplistic and naive world view.
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: If we need new trade deals, then go out and get them. If we need more border staff, hire more. If Dover needs new infastructure then build it etc etc
For me, it's as simple as that. The rest is just detail and white noise.
Ah yes nice to believe how everything is so simple. Money just comes out of thin air, everything is unlimited(eventhough it isn't) and everybody immediately grants UK what they want without wanting anything back so no need for long negotiations...
Sheesh. Attitude like that and no wonders leavers are in for a big shock when reality kicks in and UK finds out how big of a mistake they made in the first place.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/25 07:08:00
My apologies to anybody who is not young, but I'd like to remind younger dakka members that there was a time when we were not in the EU. And we built things. And we passed laws. And the sun rose, and the sun set, and so on and so on...
You build infrastructure by saying you want it built, and then leave the detail for others to sort out. If the Prime Minister wants a new rail line between London and Birmingham, it's their job to provide the political vision and the funding. It's not their job to make sure that Joe the builder has enough concrete for the day's work! Lower level managers see to that. That's the detail I'm on about. David Davis is in Brussels today for round 4 of the talks, but he won't be thrashing out the details. That's for the civil servants. Davis is there to make sure it gets done and not to micro manage.
As for funding, you'll note that there is never a shortage of money in the UK when it comes to bombing Arabs or nuclear submarines or foreign aid, or lobbing the EU £20 billion year and so on. There is plenty of money in the UK.
The problem is a lack of political will a lot of the time. The UK was bankrupt post WW2, but Atlee drove through the construction of a million new homes and of course, the NHS, in the face of bitter opposition.
Our leaders and MPs lack guts and vision. Most of them are careerists anyway.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
My apologies to anybody who is not young, but I'd like to remind younger dakka members that there was a time when we were not in the EU. And we built things. And we passed laws. And the sun rose, and the sun set, and so on and so on...
You build infrastructure by saying you want it built, and then leave the detail for others to sort out. If the Prime Minister wants a new rail line between London and Birmingham, it's their job to provide the political vision and the funding. It's not their job to make sure that Joe the builder has enough concrete for the day's work! Lower level managers see to that. That's the detail I'm on about. David Davis is in Brussels today for round 4 of the talks, but he won't be thrashing out the details. That's for the civil servants. Davis is there to make sure it gets done and not to micro manage.
As for funding, you'll note that there is never a shortage of money in the UK when it comes to bombing Arabs or nuclear submarines or foreign aid, or lobbing the EU £20 billion year and so on. There is plenty of money in the UK.
The problem is a lack of political will a lot of the time. The UK was bankrupt post WW2, but Atlee drove through the construction of a million new homes and of course, the NHS, in the face of bitter opposition.
Our leaders and MPs lack guts and vision. Most of them are careerists anyway.
Because, we have Conservatives in power, with May at the head, and she's not Prime Minister material, she's a home counties back bench MP at best. From the papers today it looks like Davis is manoeuvring for the leadership, which will almost certainly be supported by the party. He's expendable, a throwaway PM, and he's also a true believer of Brexit. God help us.
There was a time we weren't in the EU, but we have been a part of that for decades now, and extracting ourselves from there with minimal pain is complicated. Only a simpleton would advocate tearing ourselves away into WTO rules because of the huge damage that is likely to do to the economy and country.
But you know this, and are willing to "take the pain", so discussing this is rather pointless.
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
Our leaders and MPs lack guts and vision. Most of them are careerists anyway.
Absolutely; we've been in a holding pattern for a long time. We should have been throwing money at infrastructure, renewable energy, transport and technology for decades now. We should be announcing world leading projects. And the most innovative thing we've done is spend an absolute fortune talking about making trains between London and Birmingham a little bit faster.
However, that's got nothing to do with Brexit; the only way you can disengage a political entity we've been an active part of for decades just like that is if you don't give a gak about the consequences. There will be literally thousands of details that need sorting out, and a lot of infrastructure changes. Changes that can't be done just by ensuring Joe builder has a days worth of concrete - you need to get funding for it, plan it, ensure it'll solve the problem, build it correctly, manage it.
Sure stuff worked before the EU and it'll work after, but it's madness to think it can be done just by issuing a few edicts.
And that's once we know what the gak we want. We're still at the "WTF is going on?" stage, never mind the "how do we do this?" stage.
I certainly get the impression your entire focus is on leaving the EU, and aren't really considering the implications or side effects.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/25 08:29:58
Whirlwind wrote: I suppose downwards is a direction, but for me its not preferable as I don't have gills. However I'd question anyone that said they knew where any direction will lead to. None of us have crystal balls.
Nonsense. We DO know what direction the EU is heading in. Ever Closer Union. Its written into the very foundation of the EU, it is the very antithesis of the independent Nation State.
All we can do is make predictions based on the evidence to hand.
Exactly. And the evidence indicates that the EU will never be satisfied, the leaders of the EU (Juncker et al) make no secret about their desire for further integration. In their own words there is no Status Quo. We either continue integrating and allow our national independence and sovereignty to be chipped away, or we leave now before its too late.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/25 10:43:45
to the nearest airport of their choice still stands. 
bloody hell eh ?
