Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[Confusion of VIs]

20 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

I'm an ardent Remainer but I do find this point a bit disingenuous.  It's clearly the case that the EU is more ambitious and advanced than anything else anywhere in the world, and doesn't have any precedent.

It's more developed certainly but the logic behind creating a level playing field for free trade is leading others along the same path.

[Riedquat]

11 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

It's more developed certainly but the logic behind creating a level playing field for free trade is leading others along the same path.

Feature creep, overlooking why they didn't go to that level of integration in the first place.

[pig]

3 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

It started the day after the vote. Remainers ranting about thick racists. I saw friends frothing at the mouth on facebook. Since then Leavers have picked up the baton and give as good as they get...but it started with the poor losers. Now I don’t give a monkies. Quite enjoy watching it and lobbing the odd grenade in. We are leaving. The economy may suffer to varying degrees, but in my view, and millions of others, it is a price worth paying. Get over it.

Are you having a laugh ? Did you not notice decades of 'thick racist's' groomed by the DM,  BJ's EU poison in the DT and irritation (tbf it used to be mere irritation) over family dinner tables up and down the land ?

 

You do realise that you radicalised remainers 

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

2 hours ago, crouch said:

Why should he return it? He's not saying that all agricultural subsidy is bad but the structure of subsidy that is the CAP is bad.

Before we joined the EU  we subsidised particular sectors of agriculture for whatever reason ( strategic food supplies; social reasons ) but imported food at World prices.

He is not against subsidy; just the structure that is the CAP.

Why should he keep it? Oh yes because it served a purpose for him to take the shilling. No doubt he’s now taking an even larger shilling from elsewhere. Like all good hypocrites. 

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

2 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Paying for what? 

So that HovelInHove can buy his own hovel in Hove. Remember the main mantra for your average leaver is to blame all others for your own failings. He blames immigrunts for being a RFL. 

[thecrashingisles]

47 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Feature creep, overlooking why they didn't go to that level of integration in the first place.

This is also disingenuous.  We shouldn't feel constrained by the lowest common denominator.

[Riedquat]

38 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

This is also disingenuous.  We shouldn't feel constrained by the lowest common denominator.

Why "lowest common denominator"? You're putting words in my mouth there.

[thecrashingisles]

23 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Why "lowest common denominator"? You're putting words in my mouth there.

They are my words but they reflect your argument which is that if no-one else is doing it, we shouldn't either.

[Riedquat]

Just now, thecrashingisles said:

They are my words but they reflect your argument which is that if no-one else is doing it, we shouldn't either.

That still doesn't explain the use of "lowest common denominator," which carries implications of low quality. In any case whilst "everyone else does it this way" isn't a particularly compelling argument in its own right it is valid to ask why are we doing things differently?

That's not related to the feature creep argument though. I base that on the concept that when an idea is first put in to practice those doing so have a good idea of what they want to achieve and want it to look like. Now of course some change will happen after that - tweaks to adjust teething problems and a bit of evolution of the concept as peoples' outlook changes, but numerous small changes that are introduced without the level of consideration that went in to the original concept can significantly change it under our noses (whether deliberately or otherwise).

[thecrashingisles]

1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

That still doesn't explain the use of "lowest common denominator," which carries implications of low quality. In any case whilst "everyone else does it this way" isn't a particularly compelling argument in its own right it is valid to ask why are we doing things differently?

That's not related to the feature creep argument though. I base that on the concept that when an idea is first put in to practice those doing so have a good idea of what they want to achieve and want it to look like. Now of course some change will happen after that - tweaks to adjust teething problems and a bit of evolution of the concept as peoples' outlook changes, but numerous small changes that are introduced without the level of consideration that went in to the original concept can significantly change it under our noses (whether deliberately or otherwise).

Nothing fundamental has happened in the development of the EU that wasn't intended at the beginning.  Mission creep is the wrong concept to talk about - integration was the mission.

[crouch]

2 hours ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Why should he keep it? Oh yes because it served a purpose for him to take the shilling. No doubt he’s now taking an even larger shilling from elsewhere. Like all good hypocrites. 

Of course it serves a purpose; all subsidies are meant to "serve a purpose". No doubt if the UK sets up its own system post Brexit he will take that. It doesn't make him a hypocrite.

As for the "no doubt...." this is just a sneer.

[crouch]

1 hour ago, thecrashingisles said:

Nothing fundamental has happened in the development of the EU that wasn't intended at the beginning.  Mission creep is the wrong concept to talk about - integration was the mission.

I think this is quite right.

In the 1920s two officials of the League of Nations, Jean Monnet and Arthur Salter, a British civil servant, conceived a United States of Europe ruled by unelected technocrats. They had seen at first hand how the League of Nations had been destroyed by national veto and they also wished to avoid the need to consult people in elections. The EU is composed of the same four institutions as was the League of Nations:  a commission, a council of ministers, a parliament and a court.

The timeline on these matters was:

"During his term as the League of Nations deputy-secretary general (1920-23), Monnet became frustrated by member states power of veto and became committed to the idea of an entirely new ‘supra-national’ form of government, beyond the control of national governments, politicians or electorates.

In 1931, Salter published ‘The United States of Europe’ proposing that the method used to unify Germany in the 19th century should be used to create a United Europe, i.e. by establishing a Zollverein or  ‘common market’, funded by a common tariff on all goods imported from outside with “a political instrument to determine how the distribution [of those funds] should be made”.

Salter also proposed an institutional structure based on the League of Nations, with a “Secretariat” as the central source of authority – a permanent body of international civil servants, loyal to the new organisation  (not to the member countries) – essentially government by “Supranational” bureaucracy."

It was indeed all intended to be undemocratic from the start.

Edited August 13, 2019 by crouch

[zugzwang]

3 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Briefly returning to the topic of house prices. On Friday I went to a seminar given by one of the major forecasting firms (work NDA means I cannot say which) on preparing for the possibility of a no deal exit. 

One item covered was the BoEs preparation for such an event. As for the night of the referendum, they have already agreed and signed off their plans for dealing with the fallout. Along the lines of immediate provision of liquidity, a cut in interest rates to 0%, a multi year programme of QE and FLS on steroids to force down mortgage rates particularly on high LTV loans. 

The driver for this seemed to be an belief that to avoid a deep recession asset prices must be held up in £ terms, and that the strain of a no deal should be taken by the exchange rate.

The more cynical among the audience seemed to think that this strategy was more about creating a post Brexit window of opportunity, before inflation hits, for the Tories to win an election than protecting the long term interests of the country.   

 

Seems like Bozo and Cummings are looking to create a third housing bubble, subsidised with QE/FLS as was Osborne's (a necessity given the near-record levels of household indebtedness). The imported food/fuel inflation is going to be murderous but the Batshit vote will be shielded from much of it by the triple lock. Economic suicide, ofc. Another half trillion on the national debt by 2025 while private sector debt/GDP is driven ever higher into the death zone.

 

Edited August 13, 2019 by zugzwang

[winkie]

4 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Briefly returning to the topic of house prices. On Friday I went to a seminar given by one of the major forecasting firms (work NDA means I cannot say which) on preparing for the possibility of a no deal exit. 

One item covered was the BoEs preparation for such an event. As for the night of the referendum, they have already agreed and signed off their plans for dealing with the fallout. Along the lines of immediate provision of liquidity, a cut in interest rates to 0%, a multi year programme of QE and FLS on steroids to force down mortgage rates particularly on high LTV loans. 

The driver for this seemed to be an belief that to avoid a deep recession asset prices must be held up in £ terms, and that the strain of a no deal should be taken by the exchange rate.

The more cynical among the audience seemed to think that this strategy was more about creating a post Brexit window of opportunity, before inflation hits, for the Tories to win an election than protecting the long term interests of the country.   

 

 

[Dorkins]

7 hours ago, kzb said:

It's not a real discipline like engineering or even medicine.  We don't vote for political parties based on computer-modelling the effect of their policies on GDP.  Perhaps we should but we don't.

We have hordes of swamp creatures identifying problems and other hordes of swamp creatures applying appropriate solutions.  Look where that has got us.  It's called Problem-Reaction-Solution.

If Brexit isn't radical why are you all so excited by it?  Hopefully it is just the start.

 

Yes I know how the Brexit millenarian cult works: after Brexit, all will be made good (don't ask how). I just don't believe it. Brexit seems to be putting HPI and banker loving swamp creatures in charge. No chance of house prices being allowed to crash and the banks' failed lending being marked zero under a Johnson/Rees-Mogg/Raab/Javid/Farage government.

Same with the Trumpian revolution. Number of swamps drained to date = zero. If anything the swamp has been topped up and a few chickens thrown in in the form of tax cuts for the already-wealthy funded by increasing the deficit. If there is no plan for how the system will be reformed then it won't be.

Who is it the swamp creatures really hate? It starts with a C and ends with orbyn. I think the swamp creatures would be absolutely fine with a Johnson-Farage coalition government, plenty of old money represented there so no threat to the status quo.

Edited August 13, 2019 by Dorkins

[dugsbody]

2 hours ago, crouch said:

It was indeed all intended to be undemocratic from the start.

It isn't undemocratic, as has been explained many times.

Why do you persist with your propaganda?

[crouch]

37 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

It isn't undemocratic, as has been explained many times.

Why do you persist with your propaganda?

Because I don't agree with the "explanation".

Propaganda is where you try to convince others; I'm not trying to convince anyone.

[dugsbody]

Just now, crouch said:

Because I don't agree with the "explanation".

Propaganda is where you try to convince others; I'm not trying to convince anyone.

You're merely parroting your lie endlessly.

[crouch]

17 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

You're merely parroting your lie endlessly.

I never parrot anything but you parrot the lie that the EU is democratic endlessly.

[smash]

19 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

You're merely parroting your lie endlessly.

Although I don't wish to call anyone a propagandist it is worth mentioning that repeating the message again and again, a normalisation, is a key part of any propaganda campaign.

[ZeroSumGame]

8 hours ago, thecrashingisles said:

Let's take Ireland as our model then.  England can escape the imperial superstate of the UK and become a modern European nation on an equal footing with the rest in the EU.

✅?

[yodigo]

It's not all doom and gloom in EU land, I did go to Brussels many years ago as part of a campaign to lobby MEPs into voting against some bill or other. Contrary to what some leavers would say, we were successful an the bill was defeated!!

Not something I ever want to do again though.

[smash]

17 minutes ago, yodigo said:

It's not all doom and gloom in EU land, I did go to Brussels many years ago as part of a campaign to lobby MEPs into voting against some bill or other. Contrary to what some leavers would say, we were successful an the bill was defeated!!

Not something I ever want to do again though.

You can't remember what the bill was despite travelling to Brussels about it?

[yodigo]

1 hour ago, smash said:

You can't remember what the bill was despite travelling to Brussels about it?

Of course I can, but I value my privacy.

[zugzwang]

3 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Yes I know how the Brexit millenarian cult works: after Brexit, all will be made good (don't ask how). I just don't believe it. Brexit seems to be putting HPI and banker loving swamp creatures in charge. No chance of house prices being allowed to crash and the banks' failed lending being marked zero under a Johnson/Rees-Mogg/Raab/Javid/Farage government.

Same with the Trumpian revolution. Number of swamps drained to date = zero. If anything the swamp has been topped up and a few chickens thrown in in the form of tax cuts for the already-wealthy funded by increasing the deficit. If there is no plan for how the system will be reformed then it won't be.

Who is it the swamp creatures really hate? It starts with a C and ends with orbyn. I think the swamp creatures would be absolutely fine with a Johnson-Farage coalition government, plenty of old money represented there so no threat to the status quo.

Iceland managed to jail 73 bankers and CEOs for crimes committed or commissioned in the run-up to 2008.

In the US and the UK not a single banking executive has been imprisoned for his role in the financial crisis.

In 2015, the UK's Financial Conduct Authority quietly shelved plans for an enquiry into the culture, pay and behaviour of staff in banking...

Why after forty years of this shit people keep wanting more of the same is an incomprehensible mystery to me.