Brexit and the Consequences

Atilla

Legendary member
19,413 2,848
That picture is very interesting – it appears to me as many wheels all turning slowly in different directions: what an excellent representation of Brexit.

Atilla - You get first prize for summing it up so succinctly! (y)
Have you tried looking at the picture with one eye?

Do you see anything turning with your left or right eye?

Have you tried looking at it upside down or from the side?

Look at it with a friend and which way do they see the wheels turning? Same as you or different way?

Do we have any colour blind members? Be interested to see how they see it?

Also, be good to have a dogs view of that pic too.

I think the size of the picture along with your proximity when viewing it may change perceptions.


Just my tuppance. :unsure: (y):D
 

Atilla

Legendary member
19,413 2,848
Who do you trust?
Parliaments' decision along with HoLs.

That's where the real debate with people in the know takes place.

Certainly, don't trust Boris the Doris baffoon.

Dead in a ditch my rear. His not so cool now is he. Bumbling snot.


(y)
 

Signalcalc

Veteren member
4,670 1,029
People who don't know what they are talking about keep brandishing this word about Globalist Interest or Globalism as if it explains their loss or troubles away. What it tells me is those very peeps you use the term know nothing about what they are talking about.

All large companies pretty much can operate where ever they like in the World. In fact, they can sit around the table and negotiate with the actual host government all kinds of deals. In my time it was called multi-nationals. This is how UK attracted Japanese car manufacturers to the UK. Gave them juicy subsidies to build state of the art motor plants with attractive entry into EU markets (meeting the x% value added production of any import to be within EU borders etc) These are similar rules countries like India and China now use when accommodating foreign companies. Look where Dell and Apple produce their products? In China.

These multi-national companies operate in where ever they find cost advantage to maximise profits.

So really it has absolute naff all to do with any Globalist Agendas or whatever you have in your head as explaining your troubles away. It is simply business and capitalism at its best - if I can put it that way.

Same goes for foreign companies buying out the competition and moving products around. Pat is an expert on this based on past rants about UK selling out national treasures to foreign companies who then subsequently move production away from UK to other countries.

As for National Interest, pretty much most companies in FTSE100 earn profits in other countries hence why it rises as the pound falls. FTSE rise is good for the UK right so how you can suggest it is negative is beyond me. International trade is massive, HUGE, mega big. One could argue that is why the EU is so successful, whilst participating in global trade it is successful in protecting industries within member states by crafty rules and regulations which it negotiates with other countries. Yes, it is protectionism but conducted in the best possible way.

Then you have the US and Trump, who equally is conducting protectionism in the worst possible way using tariffs without much success or subtlety. The bully boy in the playground ends up shooting himself in the foot.


I don't class my self as anything much or special. Simply a disillusioned capitalist a fascist call me whatever you like. I simply know how international trade and business works. Much like Adam Smiths invisible hand, this so called globalism is not orchestrated but simply something that occurs based on business looking to minimise costs by locating to where factors of production are cheapest. Nothing more. Pure economics.


So when you then draw conclusions by quoting Globalist Interests, trying to explain the loss of Parliamentary sovereignty or control over the military or loss of democracy, it's all made up hyped up tosh by people who know Jack.
Now I know you are definitely politically conflicted if you are defending the worlds elite globalists (Bilderberger group), is this the Libdem position also, makes a mockery of what remoaners think they are representing (or what they tell us they are representing)?

You obviously have no idea what globalism means, here the wiki link if you need it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalism

If politicians within their own nations are promoting a system of global political ideology that supercedes their own nations ideology then that politician is a globalist with little regard for the consequences of globalism on that nations citizens, furthermore, to do it without consultation or consent of that nations citizenship is a betrayal of that nation.

We don't need global political ideology to conduct world trade, the elite globalist do, because it makes their profits much easier for them. We can agree trade deals, tariff setting, production and logistical movement around the planet without trying to homogenise the global citizenship. All globalism has achieved so far is to set people against one another in the pursuit of open borders, lowering incomes, providing cheap (slave) labour and upsetting the well being of the planet, a status quo that we had to some extent before.

You stick to your pure economics view of the world, that is not the only factor in the real world.
 

Signalcalc

Veteren member
4,670 1,029
Parliaments' decision along with HoLs.

That's where the real debate with people in the know takes place.

Certainly, don't trust Boris the Doris baffoon.

Dead in a ditch my rear. His not so cool now is he. Bumbling snot.


(y)
Then when the Tory/BP coalition is in power you will be accepting what happens next? Or will you flip flop on your words again?
 

Atilla

Legendary member
19,413 2,848
I said before I'll follow and abide by Parliament's decision.

If Parliament passes hard Brexit I'll put my back into making it work with my heart and soul.

Law abiding citizen that I am :D.


I just strongly resent the loss of potential investment, jobs and institutions currently moving to EU. I would fight for each and every one of those jobs.

It is ludicrous we are giving away our treasures from our super finance industry to Frankfurt, Paris and Amsterdam after all the years they have been fighting us to claim it for their regions. Absolute stupidity in my book. HSBC are relocating 10% of their staff already so they don't lose any EU business or impacted by Brexit fiasco changes. Other banks doing same.

Why lose jobs?

Along with those jobs London and UK are losing expenditure. Jobs -> Salaries -> Expenditure -> somebody else's income.


No worries, we'll get some fishing back. Worth about 30m. LOL. Freaky Brexiteers and their maths simply do not add up.


So when Boris tells you with his red bus about the £350m his going to give to the NHS you believe him? Along with his Canadian +++++++++++++++++= deal. ROFLMAO.


So you trust Boris do you?
 

Signalcalc

Veteren member
4,670 1,029
I said before I'll follow and abide by Parliament's decision.

If Parliament passes hard Brexit I'll put my back into making it work with my heart and soul.

Law abiding citizen that I am :D.


I just strongly resent the loss of potential investment, jobs and institutions currently moving to EU. I would fight for each and every one of those jobs.

It is ludicrous we are giving away our treasures from our super finance industry to Frankfurt, Paris and Amsterdam after all the years they have been fighting us to claim it for their regions. Absolute stupidity in my book. HSBC are relocating 10% of their staff already so they don't lose any EU business or impacted by Brexit fiasco changes. Other banks doing same.

Why lose jobs?

Along with those jobs London and UK are losing expenditure. Jobs -> Salaries -> Expenditure -> somebody else's income.


No worries, we'll get some fishing back. Worth about 30m. LOL. Freaky Brexiteers and their maths simply do not add up.


So when Boris tells you with his red bus about the £350m his going to give to the NHS you believe him? Along with his Canadian +++++++++++++++++= deal. ROFLMAO.


So you trust Boris do you?
I said before in a few posts back, I don't trust any politicians, we have to/should vote for someone, so why not Boris (I wouldn't vote for him BTW unless it meant we will definitely get Brexit, Hobson's choice)?

What choice do we have:

  1. Boris
  2. Corbyn
  3. Swinson
  4. Whatshisname from the SNP
  5. Farage
  6. About 300 other party leaders.

My vote would be with one of the 300, but at this juncture it will go to whoever is most likely to get Brexit, I don't trust any of them however.
 

Signalcalc

Veteren member
4,670 1,029
FYI - info on the 'shadowy world government' of the Bilderberger group, Ken Clarke, Mark Carney et al cabal of betrayers. All the recent moves are there, shutting down free speech, control of the internet, homogenised military, global government etc, there's no getting away from those facts.

Have you ever asked yourself why we have the City of London? With its own police force, rules, banks.......

 

Atilla

Legendary member
19,413 2,848
I said before in a few posts back, I don't trust any politicians, we have to/should vote for someone, so why not Boris (I wouldn't vote for him BTW unless it meant we will definitely get Brexit, Hobson's choice)?

What choice do we have:

  1. Boris
  2. Corbyn
  3. Swinson (y):love:(y)
  4. Whatshisname from the SNP
  5. Farage
  6. About 300 other party leaders.

My vote would be with one of the 300, but at this juncture it will go to whoever is most likely to get Brexit, I don't trust any of them however.
  1. Boris :eek:
  2. Corbyn o_O

  1. Swinson :) (y):love:(y):)

  1. Whatshisname from the SNP :unsure::cool:(y)
  2. Farage 👎:devilish:(n)
  3. About 300 other party leaders. ☔
 

Atilla

Legendary member
19,413 2,848
Now I know you are definitely politically conflicted if you are defending the worlds elite globalists (Bilderberger group), is this the Libdem position also, makes a mockery of what remoaners think they are representing (or what they tell us they are representing)?

You obviously have no idea what globalism means, here the wiki link if you need it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalism

If politicians within their own nations are promoting a system of global political ideology that supercedes their own nations ideology then that politician is a globalist with little regard for the consequences of globalism on that nations citizens, furthermore, to do it without consultation or consent of that nations citizenship is a betrayal of that nation.

We don't need global political ideology to conduct world trade, the elite globalist do, because it makes their profits much easier for them. We can agree trade deals, tariff setting, production and logistical movement around the planet without trying to homogenise the global citizenship. All globalism has achieved so far is to set people against one another in the pursuit of open borders, lowering incomes, providing cheap (slave) labour and upsetting the well being of the planet, a status quo that we had to some extent before.

You stick to your pure economics view of the world, that is not the only factor in the real world.

As I said to the simple lay man say Globalism or fake news and it covers everything under the sun as they like to interpret any event.

Pigeon holing complex issues turning complex pictures into cartoons. Yep makes sense to naive children.

The word you are looking for is bilateral and multi-lateral trade agreements and cooperation between governments. It happens all the time.

EU has been so successful US has tried the NAFTA and Asia has ASEAN. Instead of trying to understand the flow and subtleties of international trade you calling it Globalism.

Matey if you don't adopt you're likely to become irrelevant and extinct. A small player in the middle of nowhere.

Those same people who trumpet globalism will be the first ones running to the lap of uncle sam to be screwed over by the likes of Trump. Special relationship is very much one sided.


When I see the word Globalism you are right it means little to me. It means someone has limited vocabulary and can't be asked to dig a little deeper to understand the layers below.
 

Signalcalc

Veteren member
4,670 1,029
Does it need to be anymore obvious, Labour are a party of remoan, no if's, no but's, all they want to do is reverse the Brexit decision, a traitorous disgrace to this country along with all the opposition parties, and they think that this latest bill will save remain, it will be reversed by the next government who certainly won't be Liebour or the Liebdems.

 

Pat494

Legendary member
14,329 1,496
Just enough time to have another referendum which will be binding. All parties must agree to abide by the result and support it.
Tough on the losers.
 

0007

Senior member
2,367 652
Just enough time to have another referendum which will be binding. All parties must agree to abide by the result and support it.
Tough on the losers.
We don't need another referendum! We had one in 2016 and the result was perfectly clear in accordance with the £9 million leaflet through my door which said that the result would be honoured – even if I voted to leave, bearing in mind Its warning of the dire consequences of my ignorance and stupidity.

If we were to adopt your suggestion would we then re-run every general election that the outgoing government were dissatisfied with? The British used to have a reputation for being good losers – what ever happened to that?
 

barjon

Legendary member
10,584 1,724
We don't need another referendum! We had one in 2016 and the result was perfectly clear in accordance with the £9 million leaflet through my door which said that the result would be honoured – even if I voted to leave, bearing in mind Its warning of the dire consequences of my ignorance and stupidity.

If we were to adopt your suggestion would we then re-run every general election that the outgoing government were dissatisfied with? The British used to have a reputation for being good losers – what ever happened to that?
The referendum decided leave but didn’t say anything about on what terms - presumably to be left for our parliamentarians to sort out. The argument ever since has been on what terms we do so. There is a strong parliamentary majority against “no deal” but no suggested deal finds a majority in Parliament, let alone acceptability with the EU.

Maybe a referendum to determine whether the people are in favour or opposed to “no deal” is appropriate?
 
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

But it's thanks to our sponsors that access to Trade2Win remains free for all. By viewing our ads you help us pay our bills, so please support the site and disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock