Brexit - in or out

[Pat494]

I too, think it is only right that British bankers should also pay this small transactions levy instead of these obese cats taking bonuses they don't deserve.

Does Martin Sorrell deserve the £74m bonus ?
Obscene amount. If the politicians weren't receiving softeners from the rich they would be slapping 95% taxes on any amount over £10m. Let them bugger off to Panama and run the gauntlet there if they want to be so mean.
But looking at the other side of the coin why employ useless people like Fred the shred, heads of COOP, RBS, Tesco etc. ? Still on mega salaries. The faceless people who employe them should be fined for lack of care ! Buying the drinks at the golf club should not count.

Everyone should pay their fair share of tax whether in or out and not load it onto those that have to carry the burden.

 

[counter_violent]

HUGE BREXIT BOOST: More than 100 City executives back campaign to leave ‘damaging’ EU


About this headline news???? 100 big number. City Executives!

One for you CV with your selective banking bias and all that tosh which you seem to buy into.

They must know what they are doing right? Yes' they do!

They are protecting their bonuses! They don't want to pay a small transactions levy to the the tax payer to pay back all the bailout monies they have received.

That'll mean all the rest who can't get around the non-domiciled and off-shore account holding loopholes, continue paying off mountains of debt. That'll be the mass British public.


I too, think it is only right that British bankers should also pay this small transactions levy instead of these obese cats taking bonuses they don't deserve.

Bigger is not better.

If the mass public weren't so idle in their actions and thoughts then they would discover they do have choices. eg, they don't have to buy into crony corporate capitalism. Do I ever buy a corporate coffee from Starbucks ! No do I fek...can get a perfectly adequate cuppa from the roadside canteen for 90p as opposed to 4 quid. I go out of my way to avoid handing money over to big corp. My money is better spent (value) and appreciated more by direct dealing with small businesses.

I recon you will never be able to figure me out.

 

[Atilla]

Bigger is not better.

If the mass public weren't so idle in their actions and thoughts then they would discover they do have choices. eg, they don't have to buy into crony corporate capitalism. Do I ever buy a corporate coffee from Starbucks ! No do I fek...can get a perfectly adequate cuppa from the roadside canteen for 90p as opposed to 4 quid. I go out of my way to avoid handing money over to big corp. My money is better spent (value) and appreciated more by direct dealing with small businesses.

I recon you will never be able to figure me out.

It's not about size of Europe it's about trading pacts and agreements. However, bigger the market place and population greater is the combined creativity, producivity and GDP etc etc.


As for Brexit, don't know if you watched the Howard Shore video on the link but he has complacency shining out of his ar5e. You've probably heard of the argument "well they said the same thing about London losing it's position in finance if we don't join the Euro". People keep repeating this but it is precisely this sort of sentiment that saw the destruction of all our industries such as Ship-Building, Textiles along with others, we were or are the best and the competition will not materialise, carry on and do nothing.

We can not trade on past performance. What kind of argument is that? Hasnt' happened before so it will not happen now.

Think about it!

Each day and any change is new and should be analysed and considered as such. SWOT it out.

To pay off massive debts by applying a small transaction levy on finance (who caused all this bleeding mess in the first place any how) ONLY makes sense. UK seems to think by not paying it - somehow is going to make London the greatest place to conduct transactions. Perhaps it can but in another 10-20 years time Europe will continue to be in a better place with a strong well managed economy under the good stewardship of the Germans whilst the UK will continue with a skewed industry and economy with negative BoP and failing a pound.

There is obviously still the risk that Europe will apply sanctions and laws on transactions conducted with London and may introduce protection for it's own financial institutions and companies to insulate it self against London's grab for market share.

We have the BSI. If anybody wishes to export sofas to UK they need to ensure it is made of fire retardant material. It's simply good regulation. So if you are a Chinese manufacturer you will need to comply or you don't get to sell your cheap sofa in the UK.

Same with EU. If you want to trade with EU financial institution or corporation lets say trading bonds one will pay a levy. So what will EU bodies requiring finance do? Come to London to seek finance and if London wishes to do business servicing EU needs, they will pay one way or another. If EU does a deal with Asia Pac there is nothing to stop EU institutions going to HK, Tokyo or US to seek finance.

Lloyds' of London faced similar competition with Asian tigers stealing business few decades ago.


Also, the stupid idiot replies to a question on migration with well you are Danish (the presenter) and you are here. What's that got to do anything with the price of cheese?

Free movement of Labour is an ESSENTIAL ingredient to efficient and productive use of all factors of production including capital. Some people simply do not understand this with what a common standard market stands for.

Land is fixed, capital can move but Labour can't??? This would be a silly arrangement. In the long run it will ultimately lead to inefficient use of resources and pricing mismatch. It's a fact. :!:

Just as capital moves to where it can gain best returns so must Labour. This is obvious right?

UK farms would not be able to operate without labour from the Balkans because no one else is willing to do the work. On the other hand there is idle labour sitting doing nothing in let's say Bulgaria. No brainer to UK farmers. UKIP should get out more and talk to productive people who like farmers likely to be in the minority.

The hope that if we stop Bulgarians, somehow British workers will take their place is simply not true.

 

[kalott]

maybe its time to start a new union with uk, germany, sweden, norway, finland, denmark and maybe a few others?

a problem would be a strong currency?

 

[hhiusa]

maybe its time to start a new union with uk, germany, sweden, norway, finland, denmark and maybe a few others?

a problem would be a strong currency?

You took the words out of my mouth. I already proposed such an idea.

 

[Oscar Reed]

Bigger is not better.

If the mass public weren't so idle in their actions and thoughts then they would discover they do have choices. eg, they don't have to buy into crony corporate capitalism. Do I ever buy a corporate coffee from Starbucks ! No do I fek...can get a perfectly adequate cuppa from the roadside canteen for 90p as opposed to 4 quid. I go out of my way to avoid handing money over to big corp. My money is better spent (value) and appreciated more by direct dealing with small businesses.

I recon you will never be able to figure me out.

Bit un-British drinking coffee.
One of the great things about Australia is that you can get a decent cup of tea.
Ask for a cup of tea in the US and they look at you funny.

Noisy lawnmowers do you cut your grass with scissors in the UK.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/36642906-dc0e-11e5-9ba8-3abc1e7247e4.html#axzz47LuHrjNK

 

[Pat494]

Of course with Britain's exit, leaves EU dominance wide open for the Germans. A ready made 4th Reich without a shot being fired. I am coming round to staying in to see they have a bit of competition and not to be left sulking on the fringes. Even with all the bad things like 2 Parliamentary places etc.

 

[Splitlink]

Yes, Angela is a bit domineering, isn't she?

 

[Mr Sept]

Ask for a cup of tea in the US and they look at you funny.

....so its not the 'accent' then............:whistling

 

[Pat494]

I see the Donald has put his tuppence worth of wisdom into the debate. His view is Britain is better out. One step nearer to being the 51st state ?

 

[Pat494]

Yes, Angela is a bit domineering, isn't she?

She made a quick U turn on Free Speech when the Turkish President was insulted.
I don't think the Charlie Ebdo people should have been murdered though for the abuse they dished out. Dragged through the Courts and fined ( repeatedly ) would have been sufficient punishment imho
One's good name and reputation ( hard earned probably ) should be worth something.

 

[Atilla]

Was listening to this piece of news on Radio 4.

Some foolish Brexit chappy counteract it with the statement well times have changed and we are now in a different relationship???

Felt like shouting out "No sh1t Sherlock"! Times have changed indeed. It's a freaking global world we now live in. Learn to play in it.


Five former NATO secretaries general and 13 former U.S. foreign, defense and security chiefs said a U.K. withdrawal from the European Union would weaken both Britain and the bloc, urging against backing for a so-called Brexit when voters head to the polls in a referendum next month.

“Brexit would undoubtedly lead to a loss of British influence, undermine NATO and give succor to the West’s enemies just when we need to stand shoulder-to-shoulder across the Euro-Atlantic community against common threats, including those on our doorstep,” wrote the NATO chiefs, who include the two most recent incumbents, Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Jaap De Hoop Scheffer. “At a time of such global instability, and when NATO is trying to reinforce its role in eastern Europe, it would be very troubling if Britain ended its membership of the EU.”
Signatories of the NATO letter:

Peter Carrington (secretary-general 1984-88)
Javier Solana (1995-99)
George Robertson (1999-2003)
Jaap De Hoop Scheffer (2004-09)
Anders Fogh Rasmussen (2009-14)
Signatories of the U.S. letter:
Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser 1977-81
Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser 1989-93
George Shultz, secretary of state 1982-89
Richard Allen, national security adviser 1981-82
Frank Carlucci, defense secretary 1987-89
Robert Gates, defense secretary 2006-11
William Cohen, defense secretary 1997-2001
Madeleine Albright, secretary of state 1997-2001
William Perry, defense secretary 1994-97
Stephen Hadley, national security adviser 2005-09
James Jones Jr., national security adviser 2009-10
Thomas Donilon, national security adviser 2010-13
Leon Panetta, defense secretary 2011-13

 

[Atilla]

Shock horror!

Really

 

[forker]

In case you haven't seen it do so.

 

[Pat494]

In case you haven't seen it do so.

Brilliant
It makes you seriously ask why anyone would vote for such a collection of self serving bums. It won't last even with the veils of mystery and intrigue. Rule by the unelected for the dopey masses. They had a good chance to reform and have blown it !

The GREAT weakness of the EU is nothing can be changed democratically - so force is the only option left.

Sorry to flip flop on this issue but it is difficult and full of lies.
Yea out it is.

 

[Pat494]

Surely the bottom line is:-
Can the people who make the judgements on EU policy be dismissed democratically ?
With the present setup they are there for life - huge salar1es + perks.

Just not good enough and ripe for a coup by a small group of nasties.

If it is not By the people FOR the people then it's NO good period.
A handful of Commissionaires can be bribed or coerced.

 

[barjon]

Surely the bottom line is:-
Can the people who make the judgements on EU policy be dismissed democratically ?
With the present setup they are there for life - huge salar1es + perks.

Just not good enough and ripe for a coup by a small group of nasties.

If it is not By the people FOR the people then it's NO good period.
A handful of Commissionaires can be bribed or coerced.

Yes and no. Certainly the thing is run by the non-elected with all that entails, but the council of ministers (who are democratically elected in their own countries) can change all that if they so wish.

True, big changes are necessary but, in my view, that of itself doesn't justify exit set against the peace that cohesion of Europe has given and the known advantages of being in a powerful trading bloc.

It's not good enough to guess that similarly advantageous trade deals would materialise. They might, they might not. In any event it's highly unlikely that they would be better than those we know we have now.

 

[Sonicscooter]

Out.

 

[forker]

I am firmly out for sure. Their structure has all the hallmarks of revolution roots.

 

[kalott]

""No civilisation lasts for ever. Most go for between 200 and 600 years." The Maya, Romans and Angkor of Cambodia lasted 600.

And us? "Western civilisation began with the Renaissance, so we're hitting 600 years," "

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/oct/28/climatechange-population