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 ∞+3)?

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Nick_G, Mar 8, 2018.

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

    gingermrkettle Deep vein trombonist

    Let's start a rational discussion with a cost benefit analysis using measurable factors. The cost is clear, talk to us about the measurable benefits.
     
  2. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    I agree....building an argument on a 15 year forecast carries little weight. I forecast that the forecast will be out by more than the margin of error by the time we get there.

    Even sadder to me is that actually the UK is drifting apart because of it. I feel the hatred, unfortunately. I did not before.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2018
  3. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    From the Guardian:

    Prakash Loungani at the IMF analysed the accuracy of economic forecasters and found something remarkable and worrying. “The record of failure to predict recessions is virtually unblemished,” he said.

    His analysis revealed that economists had failed to predict 148 of the past 150 recessions.

    "We are getting worse at making forecasts because the world is getting more complicated.”

    So...where do we take the argument if we cannot rely on forecasts?
     
  4. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    As Rich was saying above...

    Anyway, I have no idea how you would measure the benefits of ridding ourselves of arrogant, jumped-up technocrats like Juncker, Verhofstadt, Selmayr, Barnier et al, but benefits they surely would be.

    84% of the Cod take in British territorial waters goes to the EU, most of it to France. There would presumably be measurable benefit in returning at least some of that to the British fishing industry, devastated following 1972. There is, of course, a problem. Tusk made it very clear in his speech the other day that in the forthcoming FTA agreement that there will be level playing field, no 'cherry-picking'. He then immediately went on to cherry pick the UK's contribution to the matters of security, international crime, defence and foreign affairs, ongoing cooperation in education, research and 'culture', a zero-tariff agreement on goods (in which the EU has a vast trade surplus with the UK which, of course, they don't want to lose), no disruption of air flights of full of UK tourists eager to spend their cash in EU member countries,and continued full access to the UK's territorial waters for their fishing fleets (whilst ruling out a deal on services).

    With a feather you could blow me down!
     
    timola likes this.
  5. glancaster

    glancaster In the silicon vale

    I'm sure he can and I see he has. However, I thought you might consider it had more weight and was less biased if it didn't come from the person you were criticising. I see I was wrong.

    There is something wrong with this discussion when droodzilla has to suffix his fairly neutral post 'PS I voted Remain'. Why did he feel the need to do that? Posts ought to be interpreted on the basis of their content, not on the voting history of the poster.
     
  6. gingermrkettle

    gingermrkettle Deep vein trombonist

    So the first measure is the cod population in British waters. Remember when it was on the verge of being an endangered species?
     
  7. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    The PS I voted remain bit is amusing...like your questions and observations will be treated differently because of it. I believe this to be true, though. I think Brexiteers should have online leper bells or something, so people can just hurl abuse at them, without reading what they say.
     
    timola likes this.
  8. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    Is this implying that it needs the EU to stop greedy UK fishermen from taking too much?
     
  9. HairyHaggis

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

    i'm not sure how i can best impress upon you the contrast apparent from the pov you employ to one obtained by someone living well to the north of you, in a country which voted overwhelmingly to remain , and which suffers from an ever-present democratic deficit, as evidenced by the continued presence of the likes of mogg, ids, liar fox, liar davis et al, in that jumped-up parody of a place, westminster, all of whom are determined to drag us to a position which will be welcomed only by the likes of putin, trump, le penn, farage...et al

    however, i well understand that all the debate carried on here, as well meaning as it may be, is not going to affect by a single iota, the outcome of the pending act of national self-mutilation. the extent of the damage done only remains to be seen.

    ps i voted remain

    lolz
     
  10. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    megarofl

    PS I voted out.
     
  11. HairyHaggis

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

    it certainly needed someone. if you understand fishing at all, a single modern deep sea trawler will take in a week more, comfortably more, than what constituted the entire season's catch of a fleet from one of many of the landing ports now extinct due to overfishing. britain, back in the day, was stripping the place and even trying it on in icelandic waters.

    plus, i can't recall lately having gone out to buy a piece of cod fillet and found there to be none in the shops?

    ps i voted remain
     
  12. HairyHaggis

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

    we're in the presence... :)
     
  13. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    I'd like to know more. It nearly ran out but then we stopped taking so much. And then we allowed other countries into the waters but the combined catch must have been loads less than the 70s. So if the UK only took out what is being taken out now and fished more responibly than in the past, how much extra cash in fish is there?

    haddock used to be more expensive than cod. Now in Hull at least, it is the same price.

    ps i voted out
     
  14. SteveS1

    SteveS1 I heard that, pardon?

    Britain had to bring something to the party in the 70s and all we had was fish. The reason I wonder if you deliberately stir the pot ET, is because I'm sure you know that. We went in as the sick man of Europe, our fish was one of our key bargaining chips (pun indended) in negotiating entry.

    The democratic deficit touches the lives of our citizens not one jot. An idealogue fixation from a country with unelected second chamber and hereditary monachy. Such a worry - not. It's the economy.....
     
  15. gingermrkettle

    gingermrkettle Deep vein trombonist

    It took a supranational framework like most modern problems.
     
  16. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    Let them eat fish!
     
  17. stephen bennett

    stephen bennett Mr Enigma

    Can we stop using the phrase ‘fall back in WTO rules?’ That negotiation will be tough. We’ll need to extract our quota of WTO from the EU (we are currently a member via the EU). Other countries can object and we may not get the ‘deal’ we want there either.

    Stephen
     
  18. matthewr

    matthewr spɹɐʍʞɔɐq spɹoɔǝɹ ɹnoʎ sʎɐld

    Note using that graph in your point is misleading because of the way population is distributed. "just about everywhere" is, of course, about a 2% difference. This is the same mistake Republicans make when showing the US vote by county and New York is the same size as Moose Jaw, MN.
     
  19. stephen bennett

    stephen bennett Mr Enigma

    Thing is ET, when you write stuff like this it just comes across as a bitter and irrational hatred of a group of people who happen to be foreign. What about the UK Eurocrats? We are in the EU and we have forged its rules and institutions just as much as they.

    Personally, I would have liked to have some idea of the real benefit of destroying stability and dividing the country in two.

    And numbers matter. Money matters. Not in some vague future. It matters now.

    Stephen
     
    kendo likes this.
  20. glancaster

    glancaster In the silicon vale

    Good progress already. The UK and EU already agreed how they would like to divide quotas quite civilly and without fanfare. From Oct 2017: https://www.ft.com/content/e30185c6-a83d-11e7-ab55-27219df83c97 [paywalled, sorry]

    Other countries have already objected. My understanding is that trade continues whilst the objections are considered. If it doesn't the EU are in as much trouble as us. In this disagreement it is UK + EU27 vs the objectors.
     
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