1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Oh Britain, what have you done (part ∞+2)?

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Buntobox, Feb 5, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SteveS1

    SteveS1 I heard that, pardon?

    The UK is constantly being painted as a victim here even though this is totally an act of self harm. It's no good keep on about the size of the UK economy without context of who owns those businesses and corporations and why they are here. We went into the EEC because post colonial UK was very much on the slide both in economics and as a player on the world stage. Both of those aspects have been enhanced as members, to deny that is just plain stupidity.

    Unfortunately the post colonial bit came with another downside which our media have fanned for decades. An innate feeling of both superiority and entitlement. You see it in your posts quite often that we are somehow special, well we're not. We are a desirable addition to the EU that's true, but we are by no means essential. Our arrogance over the years has indeed hampered EU reform and our influence has been diluted by the 'petulant child' act we bring out at the least provocation.

    Tusk's observation that I quoted yesterday about our 'demanding opt-outs while members, now wanting opt-ins as non-members' was amusing but not without justification. You could argue that some of our belligerence has paid off in the past. We had a very good deal that contained enviable consessions compared to others. But this lunacy is the worst type of arrogance and the EU can hardly be blamed for tiring of it.
     
    monstrous lie likes this.
  2. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    Cameron didn't dream it up, he threw the voter a rather stingy bone, as one or another government was going to have to do sooner or later, the lot of them having repeatedy denied the electorate a say through 40 years of progressive outsourcing of sovereignty to the increasingly unaccountable institutions of the EU. If it hadn't been Cameron, it would have been someone else. Cameron was just too arrogant to see how badly he had misjudged and mismanaged it.
     
  3. wacko

    wacko pfm Member

    It is not 'tempered' because those illegal wars enabled economic migrants as well as the war-zone migrants.

    Merkel knows what it is like to live behind a wall: her only other option was to build one against the migrants, sink their boats from the air; or more humanely put them in EU boats and return them to Turkey/Libya. Perhaps she also thought an influx of low paid (but some highly educated Syrians) mostly young could benefit Germany economically. And if it helped wipe out vestiges of WW2 and enable Germany to claim the high moral ground that was a bonus.

    The timing of the jump in vote in Italy points to immigrants being the trigger, especially votes for (northern) League. 5 Star proposes (just about its only policy) a minimum salary of €780 so not surprising it got some votes in the south ! It is easy to be critical of the EU to garner cheap votes in opposition: if either get into power reality will change all such chatter.

    Italy had a weak economy before it joined the Euro. The north of Italy is as strong as any area in the EU but the south remains weak.

    Austerity was the wrong answer to the 2008 crisis but the UK got that wrong too. Germany was scarred by the hyperinflation of the 1920s that brought the Nazis to power in the 1930s: it is fiscally conservative to this day.

    IMO Europe is stronger as an EU than divided for bullies like Dotard to pick off in bilateral negotiations.
     
  4. HairyHaggis

    HairyHaggis <((((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸><((((º>¸.

    i'm not sure i can entirely agree with this. aiui he agreed initially to the ref because of the howls of protest he was getting from the lunatic right within his own party (at that point in the ascendancy after 40+ years of howling). after the ge he was then further convinced of the need to go ahead with it because of the hemorrhaging of votes to an even more insane ukip fringe. i can't quite see how any other government would have felt itself subject to such pressures?
     
  5. SteveS1

    SteveS1 I heard that, pardon?

    Quite right. Cameron's referendum was pure Tory party electoral self-interest. Nothing to do with throwing the electorate a 'stingy bone' as ET puts it.
     
  6. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Mate of the bloke

    I dunno; to my surprise I found out recently that the suggestion for an in/out referendum was first mooted by Nick Clegg(!). Labour were also losing votes to UKIP, and there had been an internal spat between Blair and Brown over a possible referendum re Britain joining the Euro.
     
  7. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    Those plucky defenders of freedom who’ve stood up to EU tyranny should be recognised- Orban the ethnic nationalist, The hard right in Poland wanting political control of the judiciary, protectionist Trump, Putin and his FSB operatives, Nigel Farage, Marine Le Pen and Islamic State.
     
  8. HairyHaggis

    HairyHaggis <((((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸><((((º>¸.

    this needs some context. clegg was speaking quite some time before the last ge and with reference to the fact that we were into our 2nd generation without anyone having had a direct vote on membership. this was nothing to do with the internal strife within the tory party and/or party self-interest.

    and, there was no spat afaicr within labour, merely an extended discussion, at cabinet level and beyond, regarding the euro. and this was resolved...

    see https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/may/16/uk.euro3
     
  9. wacko

    wacko pfm Member

    From 2008 to 2016 the UK Govt could have borrowed billions of 25 year money so cheaply and built council houses, schools, hospitals, improved railways etc and the UK would be booming now. Resentment towards EU workers helping to build that infrastructure would have been limited. There would have been no Brexit vote.
    Yes it is a bit benefit of hindsight but also fairly obvious. Isn't that sort of vision and leadership that Government is supposed to provide ?
     
    stephen bennett likes this.
  10. HairyHaggis

    HairyHaggis <((((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸><((((º>¸.

    what are these things of which you speak?
     
  11. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    Yes indeed. But hang on, you were talking about "the Corbyn left hook" a page back. You realise that austerity is the norm across the EU? That Corbyn's Labour are the only social democratic party to refute austerity, AFAIK? (And also the only one not to have seen its vote collapse.)
     
  12. wacko

    wacko pfm Member

    Refuting austerity is not the entire Corbyn package. When the UK is on its knees after Brexit the rest of the Corbyn package could knock it over.
    Borrowing when it was cheap to do so and kicking UKIP in the goolies in 2016 by demonstrating how the EU can work to our advantage is what the Tory Government could and should have done.
    Cameron would have stayed to 2020 and a Corbyn win then after an economic boom and secure in the EU would have been quite a different prospect.
     
  13. bernardhepworth

    bernardhepworth pfm Member

    If I remember rightly, Merkel took a decision to let large numbers of migrants was based on upon that Germany like lots of countries has an ageing population, she took an economic and political risk in bringing so many people in a short space of time. Who know whether it will pay off, politically, it doesn't appeared to have payed off.
     
  14. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    That would all have been lovely, but...
     
  15. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    That's my understanding too. Germany has plenty of work, few people to do it, and a need to raise tax money for the pensioners. Most Germans I have met are sanguine about this, and counter any concerns about raised crime from desperate people from outside Germany with a shrug and "we have the police and prison service to deal with them".
     
  16. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    The ageing population argument surely fails to take into consideration that the immigrants too will get old. What do you do then, bring even more immigrants in, and so on, ad-infinitum?

    If that really was the motivation, it seems to lack something in the field of forward planning. Anyway, my point was that Merkel threw open the doors to the Schengen EU without actually bothering to ask any other Schengen members, and now everyone seems to be fairly fed up of the whole thing, fences and borders have re-established themselves throughout the EU, and the whole thing has led to a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment. How Merkel has managed to retain any credibility at all for so long completely fails me.
     
  17. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    Not at all. If they have been here working and paying taxes for however many years then they have earned their right to a state pension, same as they would if they had been born there and made a similar contribution.

    X pensioners need Y tax payers to pay for pensions, unless you raise taxes. The rest is easy arithmetic.

    She's currently looking much more capable than our own Rt Hon Mrs May MP.
     
  18. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    Compared with May and her government? your question about Merkel’s credibility is laughable. Like your view of the human misery of refugees - an inconvenience and an opportunity to attack those doing something to help while your own government whistles and looks in the other direction. Sums the crude, nativist, me first Brexit attitude up perfectly.
     
    SteveS1 likes this.
  19. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    Isn't that referred to now as 'whataboutism'? My opinion of Mrs May and her government is probably little different to yours.

    However, a bit of whataboutism of my own - your second point stands up to absolutely no scrutiny when it comes from someone who strongly supports an organisation that has created untold human misery in southern Europe, a misery that is only accentuated by the immigration crisis that it itself did much to create then utterly failed to plan for properly, or indeed plan for at all.

    I'm not entirely sure that your comments don't verge on blaming the European immigration crisis on people who voted for the UK to leave the EU.

    The political mess in throughout Europe at the moment is pretty much entirely the making of the EU, whether you like it or not.
     
  20. HairyHaggis

    HairyHaggis <((((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸><((((º>¸.

    rohingya crisis
    syria
    central african republic
    congo
    yemen
    aghanistan...

    i see these as being at least some of the areas of 'untold human misery' in the world (none of which, as an aside, can reasonably be attributed to the eu). southern europe does have areas of economic hardship, greece (brought about mainly due to decades of political instability and living beyond its means), southern italy (endemic and embedded corruption by mafiosi plus remote from northern industrial activity). i take it your comment is really just hyperbole?
     
    PsB and TheDecameron like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice