If things turn out badly we might be having to fill the gaps left by rats leaving the sinking ship by begging for immigrants!
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Apparently it just requires some good housekeeping.
Apparently 65 million UK citizens enjoyed a £30,000 overspending windfall.
I appear to have missed out on this.
Still I shouldn't worry how we are going to repay this as it has nothing to do with the outcome of the referendum.
p.s. how are you getting on with those time scale figures I asked for should we remain. You didn't take this long to provide them should we leave.
I wouldn't argue with that and haven't done. One could say it was the culmination of the political stupidity that resulted in so many modern wars.
.
You didn't actually miss out, rather than given to you it was spent on your behalf, though you might not appreciate how.
Among other things it's your share of Polaris, Trident, and a wide variety of other armaments. It's also your share of the costs of our wars in the Falklands, Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan.
And it's also your share of the continuing welfare state overspend.
.
I don't see where you want to go with this. What about £30,000 overspending that you mentioned?
the national debt is part of the economy. Nobody needs to eliminate it, we have to reduce it to around 60%-80% of GDP, we do that with the help of inflation and growth in GDP (that's where we need migrants), but the optimal percentage depends very much on our trading partners.
The EU encourages members to keep budget deficit to around 3% of GDP.
Under a Tory administration the answer is of course we will never pay them back, based on their present performance, does that answer your question?
For a start they need to address the question of how much is being filtered out of the economy into various pockets, Sky high Executive Salaries and vast pay offs when businesses fail, avoiding Tax using offshore Trust Funds, million pound bonuses, and preferred companies dodging tax in an absurd manner. And then there are the dodgy foreign aid gifts,and bribes to corrupt regimes,
And then their derisory wasting of money on Trident which wouldn't defend us from the attacks of a ladies knitting circle as like Botulinum Toxin and Anthrax during the last war, failed to impress the enemy as they knew very well we couldn't afford to use them.
This sham and failed confidence trick costs huge and ever increasing sums, then there's HS2 and lord knows what swindle is going on over Hinckley point.
Last but not least , how much our jolly little wars in the Middle East are costing us not only in their execution, but also the "Collateral Damage" of them contributing to the destruction of society there which has sent wave after wave of refugees in this direction.
"Call me Dave" Forgot to bother with Parliament before his do it yourself Aggressions, and lets be truthful we don't know that else he has been up to do we?
Stopping this level of stupidity amounts to "Good housekeeping"
And once we have that out of the way Governing the people for the people could be tried "Experimentally" for the first time in planetary history.
You missed out on this
"
Apparently 65 million UK citizens enjoyed a £30,000 overspending windfall."
Because it wasn't the public that did the damage, was it?
Frankly this company will fail out side of the EU because it has the worst of all enemies.
A Tory Government.
Last edited:
Flecc I have no problem with anything you have posted. As always you present a reasoned and unbiased opinion. It's just that I see things in a different way. After Friday we will know which way the country is heading.
Who said I wanted to give power to the conservatives. They have proved themselves to be untrustworthy and incompetent,just not quite as bad as the previous lot.
Thanks Gray. It is indeed very much a matter of opinion and preferences, and the outcome is going to be interesting, both which way and the margin.
I'm already wondering if we'll have to suffer endless analysis of how that outcome will affect us!
Either outcome doesn't concern me since I won't experience it long term, it's more a matter for the younger half of the population.
.
They have been demonstrably even worse, but I have no time for the Tory "B" team either that preceded them.
In answer to myself, we probably will unfortunately, and not just the political aspects!
Next week's edition of the BBC Radio 4 "The Human Zoo" program is about an aspect of the outcome, here's the blurb :
That Post-Referendum Feeling
Episode 3 of 8
In this episode, that morning-after feeling - the aftermath of the EU referendum. We put our 'X' in a box and, one way or the other, committed. What happened in that moment and what are the consequences - are we different now?
Do we have doubts or regrets, or will we stubbornly stick to our decision? The Zoo team investigate the curious psychology of being consistent and how we make ourselves feel better about the decisions we make in life.
Michael Blastland is joined by resident Zoo psychologist Nick Chater, Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School, and roving reporter Timandra Harkness.
Contributors this week include Professor Ralph Hertwig, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin; Professor Greg Maio, Cardiff University; Carol Tavris, social psychologist and author; Lee Jones, Queen Mary University of London; and Lois Pryce, travel writer and journalist.
Here's the link to listen to that shortly after the broadcast, if unable to hear it live on 28th June:
The Human Zoo
.
aaaaaaaaaarghIn answer to myself, we probably will unfortunately, and not just the political aspects!
Next week's edition of the BBC Radio 4 "The Human Zoo" program is about an aspect of the outcome, here's the blurb :
That Post-Referendum Feeling
Episode 3 of 8
In this episode, that morning-after feeling - the aftermath of the EU referendum. We put our 'X' in a box and, one way or the other, committed. What happened in that moment and what are the consequences - are we different now?
Do we have doubts or regrets, or will we stubbornly stick to our decision? The Zoo team investigate the curious psychology of being consistent and how we make ourselves feel better about the decisions we make in life.
Michael Blastland is joined by resident Zoo psychologist Nick Chater, Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School, and roving reporter Timandra Harkness.
Contributors this week include Professor Ralph Hertwig, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin; Professor Greg Maio, Cardiff University; Carol Tavris, social psychologist and author; Lee Jones, Queen Mary University of London; and Lois Pryce, travel writer and journalist.
Here's the link to listen to that shortly after the broadcast, if unable to hear it live on 28th June:
The Human Zoo
.
Gray, you need to watch this, and I mean to the end. There are lots of facts from an impartial professional expert (so expert and professional, he's a professor) It explains what can and will happen.
I did post it earlier, but you've clearly missed it, or not watched it if you think no ones presented real facts. This is full of them.
"and some fell upon stony ground and did not prosper" but I commend the effort, KTM!
While I have no idea how old the various contributors to this thread are, I think it's worth mentioning that the last Labour government left office in 1979. Some seem more than ready to condemn the Labour party for various shameful matters that occurred between 1997 and 2010 but there is a distinction that needs to considered in any criticism of that administration.
Blair and his advisors distanced themselves from the Labour movement and actually changed the party name to reflect that prior to his first election victory. The upshot was that there was little discernible change in the country's political direction under a cabinet of pink tories. All true socialists who unite under the banner of the Labour, (not New Labour), movement have condemned Blair, (many at the time and a lot more since), for his actions on many issues and rightly so. The man is an embarrassment to the Labour movement and should be subject to criminal proceedings for war crimes.
The reason I mention this is that no-one under the age of 55 has lived as an adult in the UK under a real socialist government. (Assuming adulthood at 18yo). Those born in 1961 only reached the age of majority the year Thatcher came to power. Since 1979, this country has only known right-wing political direction through Thatcherism, tory-lite, and the miserable coalition arrangement between the tories and the laughable demo-rats, the party that sold their birthright for a taste of power.
Since the last election, full resumption of Thatcherism has been reinstated with renewed vigour and the division between the haves and the have-nots has grown and that is the No.1 item on the tory agenda before all else. Of course, it doesn't appear in written form.
The Labour party quickly realised their mistake in selecting the back-stabbing Jew and great friend of Israel, Miliband, as leader and after due consideration, found someone, never a member of the Blairite, New Labour group, Jeremy Corbyn, to lead the party.
That's where we are at today. Corbyn is in the difficult position of leading a party still sporting, (and hamstrung by), a bunch of professional politicians, ie, those who aspire to be MPs and don't care which party they represent - only pursuing the easiest constituencies and riding the likeliest horse. Those are the New Labour remnants or Blairites who are really right-wing but have lied their way to an election victory after posing as a Labour politician, aided and abetted by clever campaign management. If that sounds far-fetched, check out the voting records of some of those Blairite MPs. Socialists don't normally vote for tory policies! All of them would have been tory MPs but couldn't get a candidature as a tory. Some became LibDems or Greens. The strange breed who would be MPs would do anything, absolutely anything, to gain membership of the 'best club in London.'
Come Friday, we will know which side's propaganda has been the more convincing with regard to the EU matter but the UK government will still be tory. Ca-moron will still be Prime Minister but will be replaced fairly quickly should the 'Brexit' camp win the vote. If the country decides to support the 'Bremain' case, Ca-moron is vindicated and can prepare a cabinet reshuffle at his leisure.
As things stand, the country and all those 55 year-olds and younger will be unable to experience fair and decent government under a socialist administration until 2020, barring a major political crisis.
I wonder just how many of those who added their 2p-worth in the 'Brexit' thread have actually lived under a true Labour government yet would never consider voting for that party.....and how they came to that position.
Just food for thought from a 'beer' socialist!
Tom
Blair and his advisors distanced themselves from the Labour movement and actually changed the party name to reflect that prior to his first election victory. The upshot was that there was little discernible change in the country's political direction under a cabinet of pink tories. All true socialists who unite under the banner of the Labour, (not New Labour), movement have condemned Blair, (many at the time and a lot more since), for his actions on many issues and rightly so. The man is an embarrassment to the Labour movement and should be subject to criminal proceedings for war crimes.
The reason I mention this is that no-one under the age of 55 has lived as an adult in the UK under a real socialist government. (Assuming adulthood at 18yo). Those born in 1961 only reached the age of majority the year Thatcher came to power. Since 1979, this country has only known right-wing political direction through Thatcherism, tory-lite, and the miserable coalition arrangement between the tories and the laughable demo-rats, the party that sold their birthright for a taste of power.
Since the last election, full resumption of Thatcherism has been reinstated with renewed vigour and the division between the haves and the have-nots has grown and that is the No.1 item on the tory agenda before all else. Of course, it doesn't appear in written form.
The Labour party quickly realised their mistake in selecting the back-stabbing Jew and great friend of Israel, Miliband, as leader and after due consideration, found someone, never a member of the Blairite, New Labour group, Jeremy Corbyn, to lead the party.
That's where we are at today. Corbyn is in the difficult position of leading a party still sporting, (and hamstrung by), a bunch of professional politicians, ie, those who aspire to be MPs and don't care which party they represent - only pursuing the easiest constituencies and riding the likeliest horse. Those are the New Labour remnants or Blairites who are really right-wing but have lied their way to an election victory after posing as a Labour politician, aided and abetted by clever campaign management. If that sounds far-fetched, check out the voting records of some of those Blairite MPs. Socialists don't normally vote for tory policies! All of them would have been tory MPs but couldn't get a candidature as a tory. Some became LibDems or Greens. The strange breed who would be MPs would do anything, absolutely anything, to gain membership of the 'best club in London.'
Come Friday, we will know which side's propaganda has been the more convincing with regard to the EU matter but the UK government will still be tory. Ca-moron will still be Prime Minister but will be replaced fairly quickly should the 'Brexit' camp win the vote. If the country decides to support the 'Bremain' case, Ca-moron is vindicated and can prepare a cabinet reshuffle at his leisure.
As things stand, the country and all those 55 year-olds and younger will be unable to experience fair and decent government under a socialist administration until 2020, barring a major political crisis.
I wonder just how many of those who added their 2p-worth in the 'Brexit' thread have actually lived under a true Labour government yet would never consider voting for that party.....and how they came to that position.
Just food for thought from a 'beer' socialist!
Tom
Tom, you should seriously edit out remarks about the previous New Labour leader, they are inappropriate to say the very least!
Here is the answer
"
The Isle of Man holds neither membership nor associate membership of the European Union, and lies outside the European Economic Area (EEA). Nonetheless, Protocol Three of the treaty of accession of the United Kingdom permits trade for Manx goods without non-EU tariffs.[2] In conjunction with the Customs and Excise agreement with the UK, this facilitates free trade with the UK. While Manx goods can be freely moved within the EEA, people, capital and services cannot.
As with Jersey and Guernsey, the Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom or a direct member of the European Community and its relationship with the EU is defined under Article 355(5)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (former Article 299 of the EC Treaty) and Protocol 3 of the Act of Accession, annexed to the Treaty of Accession 1972, by which the United Kingdom became a member of the European Economic Community.[3]
The restriction on free movement of persons is anomalous in that the treaty establishing the EU clearly states that all citizens of member states will also be citizens of the EU. However a special protocol was inserted in the Treaty of Accession of the United Kingdom excluding the Channel Islands and Isle of Man from the provisions governing free movement of people. This was done at the request of the governments of the Crown dependencies at the time."
In other words contrary to the popular belief it is possible to work around the free movement of peoples directive if you try, and still trade, which we did on their behalf.
And what pray do you think of that revelation??
How come we managed to get an exclusion for them if this principle is written in stone as we are led to believe?
Who's lying to us now?
the IOM is a low tax financial centre: no corporation tax, no inheritance tax, no capital gain tax. Perfect for buy to lets, family trusts etc.
Malta is another example - no natural resources but a member state of the EU. I think that's great!
Tom