Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 14stFlyer

  1. They got additional competition for fixed resources (jobs, schools, housing, etc. ). And unfair competition at that (unfair because the salary paid to Eastern European’s sending money home was more than that paid to locals setting up home in U.K. based on purchasing power parity).
  2. People seem to be focussing on one interviewed voter on Chesham High Street. I suspect there is much more variety of reasons for the Tory-LibDem and Labour-LibDem switches. Everyone has been focussed on the two very different traditional Labour voter types (traditional working class versus progressive internationalists say). However, there is now developing a similar split in Conservative voters (Pragmatic businessmen versus queen and country British Empirists perhaps). As each party focussed more on one group, they piss off the other side of their support. i suspect the LibDems have gained both Internationalists from Labour, and pragmatic businessmen from the Tories in Chesham and Amersham.
  3. Not being Tory? I suspect they have simply changed from “not Corbyn” to “not Boris”.
  4. Not flawed, just incomplete. Possibly for political reasons!
  5. I quite liked the interviewer! Not sure I saw a car crash though... must not have been watching closely enough.
  6. I think most of the projections I have seen show that we have already reached “peak births”, and that growth rate of global population will decline rapidly from here on. This is quite a conservative view from a Wikipedia page showing growth effectively ceases at 2100, but there are others that see peak population within our lifetimes (the next 50 years). It may be better for us to limit inward migration now and allow the demographic time bomb to detonate over the next 25 years rather than in 25-50 years time.
  7. But that requires mutual trust and the UK teams antics burnt that bridge. Saying be reasonible after they've been a git is expecting a lot Again the one sided view. Both sides have had plenty of “antics”. I still hope for friendly cooperation when times require it in the not too distant future.
  8. Again, especially as we start from the same place, there SHOULD be a middle ground that both sides can agree to on this.
  9. Just to add, I believe the U.K. negotiators are right to not agree to dynamic alignment with EU standards going forward.
  10. I am suggesting the NIP should be implemented as agreed. If over time we can mutually agree improvements fine. The EU have already made several suggestions for lightening the checks but the UK have rejected these because they require alignment on standards, so looks like we need to start with the agreement as is. I guess I am happy with this, except for the silly “letter of the law” stuff such as not allowing guide dogs entry from GB to Northern Ireland and not forcing double tagging for following of two different EU regulations. The point is there is a middle ground of sensible implementation (that safeguards EU and U.K. markets without unduly restricting trade and without the need for employing ludicrous numbers of staff) that is currently being studiously avoided by both sides. (in my view this avoidance is for Macron/Johnson short term political gain).
  11. Is your argument that the 17.4m did not know what they were voting for and therefore should be protected from the logical consequences of what they voted for No. I am arguing that they did not vote for a trade border in the Irish Sea. I suspect a few (perhaps very few) would have been aware of livestock and phytosanitary checks if they were in the animal or farming world. That is not the same as a trade border. What is your point? If you are trying to suggest that, with a degree of application form both sides, the current protocol can work, then I am with u.
  12. Ok. I’ll buy that it was the decision of 17.4m to vote to leave the EU that caused the initial problem. I will however not accept that those 17.4m knew that their vote (combined with the negotiating approaches of the U.K. govt and EU commission) would lead to a border in the Irish Sea. Yes, I know I did not vote for Brexit and so should not be representing these voters, but quite frankly if you asked them, yes or no, if they wanted a border in the Irish Sea they would say no by an extremely high margin. If you believe otherwise you are simply wrong. So, in my view, the Irish Sea border has been invented during negotiatons. To say it was “wanted” by Brexit voters is simply rewriting history.
  13. Exactly this. And the same would be true for U.K. govt as well. But we have the GFA, and both sides will stick to it like glue (quite rightly), so we have the fudge, and the continued rhetoric from both sides of one being the “hostage” of the other.
  14. I can only see two possibilities. 1. We abandon the loyalists in NI and let the EU sort out the mess / disaster. 2. We put a label on the sausages that says "Not for sale in the EU". +1. The fudge is workable if both sides are prepared to work at it.
  15. I am beginning to think it will. There are only two options ahead that I can see as I cannot envisage either a clear EU u turn or (sorry Yelims) a clear U.K. govt u turn. So for me, choices are: 1. Both sides agree (in private) to “pretend and extend” until the spotlight moves elsewhere (and so current agreement lasts 5 years with some dodgy fudging of issues). 2. One side or both escalate towards a trade war, tensions in NI, and legal wrangling (which will again probably take more than 5 years to reach final outcome and force change to current agreement).
  16. No, but lots of people voted for him. I still cannot understand why.
  17. It was the EU side that wanted a border in the Irish Sea, not U.K. govt, and certainly not “the 17.4 million”. sometimes I feel as if the Remain side are trying to rewrite history as much as the Brexiteers.
  18. Hostage taker blames negotiators for killing the hostages. 🙄 It’s all about perspectives. Most people I talk to think it is the EU negotiators that have taken NI hostage in an attempt to stop U.K. leaving the single market. These adversarial rather than cooperative approaches and views are not useful, but now appear unavoidable.
  19. 6. The U.K. and EU essentially agree to continue to kick the can with further “short term fudges” and legal stand offs until the media get tired and look elsewhere for their stories I like 6 because, as we (and I believe both the EU negotiators and the Johnson government) have known right from the start, none of the others are feasible and work with our Tory hard Brexit.
  20. What makes you think that the EU did not want this to happen? The EU have a treaty to follow that essentially gives them trade and business supremacy over part of U.K. territory, and the U.K. are looking both untrustworthy and a little bit silly on the international stage. What is not to like?
  21. Ahh 😦. I see a clash between the Politics of Ideology and the reality of politics coming our way soon...
  22. And this time we will be talking about access to the “Great British Banger”!
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.