Brexit - whats the difference.....

[ChopleyIOM]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Oh dear what a non surprise. The neoliberal people in thrall to corporations and WEF all see eye to eye.


One Whitehall source said: ‘Jeremy has long been a huge admirer of Tony Blair. You could see it in the Chatham House conversation. It was a real love-in.

‘When Blair was critical of Brexit, there was no push back from Jeremy.’ (Hunt is a Remainer.)

View attachment 176373

That's nothing particularly new though, politicians from across the divide have often liked/admired other politicians from their own or other political parties. It's well known that Blair admired Thatcher, for example - and built a lot of the success of New Labour by understanding how Thatcher and the Tories managed to dominate the UK political landscape for so long.

New Labour were not a particularly left wing project, they did a lot of good stuff but very much within the realm of centrist politics, which is the ground that Starmer has moved the Labour party back to, it might win an election but it won't radically improve the lot of most people in the UK. We had a shot at a genuinely progressive government with true redistributive instincts at its core, under Jeremy Corbyn's Labour, but instead the country decided to 'GET BREXIT DONE' with Boris and look where we are now.

If Corbyn had won he'd have renationalised all those privatised utilities that are currently reaming the arse out of the population of the UK on their bills, or in the case of the water companies, filling our seas with shit. And of course the power companies are being given billions of pounds of taxpayer money to subsidise bills and maintain their profits with the energy price guarantee. Ahhh but crazy old Corbyn wanted to give poor people FREE INTERNET, can't have that, would have brought the country to its knees.

Still, at least we got Brexit and what a magnificent success it's been.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Can't win 'em all, I suppose. (Or in the case of Brexit, can't win anything.)

Once more we see the impact of the UK losing its unique 'staging post' position into the EU, see also all the business that has gone to Ireland, which of course remains a full EU member.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

And Daniel 'no one is suggesting we lose our access to the single market' Hannan (officially the most consistently wrong person in the history of the world) appears to have actually gone mad.

Spoiler alert - Singaporean isn't even remotely happening either, not that we'd want it to anyway.

 

[Daavid63]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Oh dear what a non surprise. The neoliberal people in thrall to corporations and WEF all see eye to eye.


One Whitehall source said: ‘Jeremy has long been a huge admirer of Tony Blair. You could see it in the Chatham House conversation. It was a real love-in.

‘When Blair was critical of Brexit, there was no push back from Jeremy.’ (Hunt is a Remainer.)

View attachment 176373

I think some where is a video of that, Hunt was giving Blair a handjob and just out of view was chopley with the tissues, remainers stick together as they say!!

 

[pinnit2014]

I think some where is a video of that, Hunt was giving Blair a handjob and just out of view was chopley with the tissues, remainers stick together as they say!!

 

[Jono777]

So glad I keep out of these type of threads 99% of the time.

That being said, If anyone is arranging a collection for a new keyboard for Mr. Chopley for Christmas, I'll be happy to chip in

 

[pinnit2014]

Not now she isn't - she is a busted flush as are her supporters. The SNP are a one trick pony, wasting tax payer funds going to the Supreme Court, knowing full well the decision would not go their way. Now they are being denied democracy!

Do not make me laugh! They had a democratic vote only 8 years ago. Compare that to the EU referendums in the UK. Prior to 2016, the last one was in 1974 just before I was born. Slightly longer than 8 years!

The SNP are toast, as their trump card and ace up their sleeve being the Tory government will be out of power in two years time. If current polls are to be believed, Labour are heading for a landslide of Tony Blair epic proportions.

The SNP cannot even handle the powers devolved to the Scottish Govt, but continue to garner support because the Tory government is pretty much universally despised North of the Border. They are able to get away with their many failings by blaming the tories, whilst beating the well worn drum for independence.

All they do is mismanage Scotland - Ferries. NHS, Education, drug problem....... As they have only one goal and one goal only.

For quite a savvy Politician (and she does outmaneuver a lot of her contemporaries), she's misjudged the mood of the nation in pressing for it: it's not coming from Joe Public on the street, but her own Party.

Scotland has probably one of the most distinctive cultures in Europe (in/out?), yet when you talk to some of her most ardent fanatics, you'd think, when they walk to the shop, they're screaming at the sky: this country is being Anglicised, it must stop! It's quite bizarre. Someone said to me a month or so ago: this will happen, and then we'll be free (i actually thought they were parodying) but they were talking as if they were a journalist locked up for 30 years in a Turkish prison.

Ironically enough, same person highlighted Westminster wasting money doing x,y,z, whilst palming the SNP's record, or not, in some of the places you've mentioned off as being: cos of the Tories and having to correct Certainly into Cult territory.

Even the Health Secretary here, a nutjob in every aspect, said the UK has a 'moral obligation' to provide more cash to Scotland, yet conveniently forgetting his own Party's obligation to respect a democratic vote. Go figure.

What i would say is that i don't think they're toasted bread - they're been tapping into the 'Yoof' vote and i do think they'll get a second one but probably not before 2025.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

So glad I keep out of these type of threads 99% of the time.

That being said, If anyone is arranging a collection for a new keyboard for Mr. Chopley for Christmas, I'll be happy to chip in

It's alright it's a very nice mechanical keyboard with a ten year guarantee It's done seven years up to now and still going strong, and it does get the occasional 'key bash' when emulated fruit machines irritate me

 

[Webzcas]

Corsair, good make

For quite a savvy Politician (and she does outmaneuver a lot of her contemporaries), she's misjudged the mood of the nation in pressing for it: it's not coming from Joe Public on the street, but her own Party.

Scotland has probably one of the most distinctive cultures in Europe (in/out?), yet when you talk to some of her most ardent fanatics, you'd think, when they walk to the shop, they're screaming at the sky: this country is being Anglicised, it must stop! It's quite bizarre. Someone said to me a month or so ago: this will happen, and then we'll be free (i actually thought they were parodying) but they were talking as if they were a journalist locked up for 30 years in a Turkish prison.

Ironically enough, same person highlighted Westminster wasting money doing x,y,z, whilst palming the SNP's record, or not, in some of the places you've mentioned off as being: cos of the Tories and having to correct Certainly into Cult territory.

Even the Health Secretary here, a nutjob in every aspect, said the UK has a 'moral obligation' to provide more cash to Scotland, yet conveniently forgetting his own Party's obligation to respect a democratic vote. Go figure.

What i would say is that i don't think they're toasted bread - they're been tapping into the 'Yoof' vote and i do think they'll get a second one but probably not before 2025.

One point that has been overlooked, is the fact that there being a fundamental change in the UK being the reason as to why The SNP want another referendum so soon after the one that took place in 2014. It was after all meant to be a 'Once in a generation' opportunity - not my words, not in the Edinburgh agreement, but words that fell out of the mouths of Salmond and Sturgeon on the campaign trail in 2014.

This fundamental change was Brexit, when the Scottish electorate voted decisively to remain in the EU.

However, if Scexit happened in 2014, not only would Scexit cause Scotland to have exited stage left from the UK, but they would have also dragged Scotland out of the EU also

 

[sufferinsilence]

Corsair, good make

One point that has been overlooked, is the fact that there being a fundamental change in the UK being the reason as to why The SNP want another referendum so soon after the one that took place in 2014. It was after all meant to be a 'Once in a generation' opportunity - not my words, not in the Edinburgh agreement, but words that fell out of the mouths of Salmond and Sturgeon on the campaign trail in 2014.

This fundamental change was Brexit, when the Scottish electorate voted decisively to remain in the EU.

However, if Scexit happened in 2014, not only would Scexit cause Scotland to have exited stage left from the UK, but they would have also dragged Scotland out of the EU also

I prefer to call it Sexit.

Don't ask why.

 

[pinnit2014]

ANOTHER QUICK QUIZ - Who is the most patronising, condescending WANKER on this entire forum, due to the fact that he literally gets his rocks off
while "addressing" his fellow CM members like they are ALL still in fucking nursery school?

I'll give you a clue. It starts with Chopley and ends with IOM.

Fucking arsehole. Go kneel at the feet of a woman with a penis and pledge everlasting allegiance to it, you insufferable woketard.

Do you EVER look in the mirror and tell yourself "I'm really going to try hard NOT to be a total fucking bellend on the CM forum today?"

Because if you do, you fail. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

Whilst i lack your balls, i do get the sentiment

I've sat and merited the SNP question, and flitted between both sides and had decent convos with people, but it's all how you present it. Unfortunately for the poster, it's a soap box for his own copy and paste agenda, not really interested in hearing other folks' opinion (as that is not the point in his posts) and it is tiresome at this point.

Even when presented with alternative view, because it's not what the Guardian Editor believes, it's side swiped.

And FYI, I voted remain and i find their posts weary-some.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Whilst i lack your balls, i do get the sentiment

I've sat and merited the SNP question, and flitted between both sides and had decent convos with people, but it's all how you present it. Unfortunately for the poster, it's a soap box for his own copy and paste agenda, not really interested in hearing other folks' opinion (as that is not the point in his posts) and it is tiresome at this point.

Even when presented with alternative view, because it's not what the Guardian Editor believes, it's side swiped.

And FYI, I voted remain and i find their posts weary-some.

When presented with alternative views I'll make a genuine attempt to assess the veracity of the claim being made and see if there's any evidence to back it up, if there isn't, or there's a strong opposing case to make, I'll do so - if you want to call that 'side swiping' then fair enough, but I'm not just going to pretend I think all viewpoints are equal when some have evidence to back them up, and some don't.

I mean, there's a literal flat earth society out there that genuinely tries to assert that the earth is flat and back it up with their 'evidence'. It's very easy to prove that the earth is not flat, I might 'hear their opinion' but I'll also 'side swipe' it away because I'll have the facts on my side.

A lot of the problem with Brexit is that it was sold by flat earthers, to be clear I'm not saying that the people who voted for Brexit believe that the earth is flat, the flat earthers who pitched Brexit looked reasonably legit in many ways, and they were making a compelling pitch, all of the upsides and none of the downsides - but it turned out that they were lying, the earth is not flat and Brexit has not, and indeed never could, deliver any of what was promised.

If there was just one single thing that Leave could point to, one single Brexit benefit, I'd be minded to think, 'OK fair enough, you got Thing X out of it, and you're prepared to take the hit on all the other stuff, I don't agree with it but it's a point of view I can understand'.

The obvious one here is immigration and the dinghies coming across the channel, (because let's be honest, this is why a lot of people voted for it once you strip away a lot of the other stuff, this thread alone is ample evidence of that), if Brexit had sorted that then I'd say, 'OK, you got that, it was important to you, fair enough'.

But it's done the exact opposite! We've got more people coming across the channel in dinghies than ever before, and we're worse off when it comes to sending them back because we lost the Dublin Regulation when we left the EU. On top of that, immigration to the UK by legal routes is now higher than it's been for years, it's just that EU migration is down, and migration is up from non-EU countries, and eclipsing the drop from EU countries in the process.

It's not my fault that the 'debate' around Brexit and its impact is so incredibly lop-sided, it's the fault of the conmen and charlatans who sold the UK an absolute pup, and who now flail around looking for anything and anyone to blame to explain away why it's all turned to shit.

And it's not just what the Guardian editor believes, it's what a majority of people in the UK, and a growing majority at that, now believe - because they can see the evidence with their own eyes.

 

[goatwack]

I mean, there was a time in history when scientists and scholars universally agreed upon the earth being flat. Who's to say modern Flat Earthers aren't simply reverting back to the truth? Flat Earth's coming home?

And has anyone here actually walked around the whole globe, or are they simply going by what 'they' want you to believe, with pictures of globes and other spherical fibs? ?

 

[mack341]

When presented with alternative views I'll make a genuine attempt to assess the veracity of the claim being made and see if there's any evidence to back it up, if there isn't, or there's a strong opposing case to make, I'll do so - if you want to call that 'side swiping' then fair enough, but I'm not just going to pretend I think all viewpoints are equal when some have evidence to back them up, and some don't.

I mean, there's a literal flat earth society out there that genuinely tries to assert that the earth is flat and back it up with their 'evidence'. It's very easy to prove that the earth is not flat, I might 'hear their opinion' but I'll also 'side swipe' it away because I'll have the facts on my side.

A lot of the problem with Brexit is that it was sold by flat earthers, to be clear I'm not saying that the people who voted for Brexit believe that the earth is flat, the flat earthers who pitched Brexit looked reasonably legit in many ways, and they were making a compelling pitch, all of the upsides and none of the downsides - but it turned out that they were lying, the earth is not flat and Brexit has not, and indeed never could, deliver any of what was promised.

If there was just one single thing that Leave could point to, one single Brexit benefit, I'd be minded to think, 'OK fair enough, you got Thing X out of it, and you're prepared to take the hit on all the other stuff, I don't agree with it but it's a point of view I can understand'.

The obvious one here is immigration and the dinghies coming across the channel, (because let's be honest, this is why a lot of people voted for it once you strip away a lot of the other stuff, this thread alone is ample evidence of that), if Brexit had sorted that then I'd say, 'OK, you got that, it was important to you, fair enough'.

But it's done the exact opposite! We've got more people coming across the channel in dinghies than ever before, and we're worse off when it comes to sending them back because we lost the Dublin Regulation when we left the EU. On top of that, immigration to the UK by legal routes is now higher than it's been for years, it's just that EU migration is down, and migration is up from non-EU countries, and eclipsing the drop from EU countries in the process.

It's not my fault that the 'debate' around Brexit and its impact is so incredibly lop-sided, it's the fault of the conmen and charlatans who sold the UK an absolute pup, and who now flail around looking for anything and anyone to blame to explain away why it's all turned to shit.

And it's not just what the Guardian editor believes, it's what a majority of people in the UK, and a growing majority at that, now believe - because they can see the evidence with their own eyes.

Here's a challenge Chop, instead of the emphasis on Brexit being crap etc...give us some positive things that the EU are doing that we should follow as we're currently not?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Here's a challenge Chop, instead of the emphasis on Brexit being crap etc...give us some positive things that the EU are doing that we should follow as we're currently not?

I will answer your question mack but before I do so, goodness me, is this really where we're at? Remainers now have to demonstrate to Leavers what the EU are doing that the UK is missing out on? We never wanted this, we didn't vote for it, anyone who voted remain was literally saying, 'On balance we'll stick with how things are, it might not be perfect, but it seems better to us than the alternative, and we have been persuaded enough by those who know more about it than me that there is the potential for the UK to sustain real economic damage as the result of a Leave vote'.

I'm old enough to remember when Brexiteers were telling us Remoaner types what moaning minnies we were, how great Brexit would turn out to be, and to cry some more Remoaner tears. (In this very thread, in fact. Those people have gone rather quiet now.)

You have also phrased your question somewhat disingenuously, and moved the goalposts by asking for examples of some fresh 'good' things the EU is doing, rather than using the obvious starting position of what the UK has LOST by leaving in the first place. (Which is very well documented in this thread already, and is currently kicking the crap out of the entire UK economy, whilst we also now can't send asylum seekers back to France because we lost the Dublin Regulation.)

We lost a load of stuff when we left the EU, if we haven't replaced it with anything better, or at least as good, then by definition we're in a net loss position.

Anyway, the good news is we can see what the EU is up to on this website here, in a publicly available and searchable database (so far better than, for example, the secrecy and corruption behind how the UK government awarded its corrupt multi-billion pound PPE contracts for PPE that it ended up having to set fire to because it was so crap as to be unusable).

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

There's a lot there, but one that stood out to me immediately is this one, and I thought, 'What a splendid idea'. I appreciate this is a personal choice, but hopefully you can understand how it could be important to many other people.

(And by all means have a browse through, there's a lot of good stuff in there.)

Our daughter is disabled, she receives the highest component of Disability Living Allowance and Mrs Chopley is paid the full award of Carer's Allowance. We have tried travelling off island with her on three occasions now. It's a challenge, not least because her disability is 'invisible', we've had mixed experiences with the yellow and green disability lanyard she can wear to indicate she has an invisible disability, and we've all (including her) reached the conclusion that she can't do airports (or planes), it's too much for her.

As such, we've now got a plan to get a camper van and travel in that (probably still 4-5 years away from this point), so we can take our home with us, as it were. Avoid airports, not have to worry about provision/support at hotels, always have a safe quiet space, and so on.

Our intention is to try some trips to the UK first, and if successful, to travel further afield to the EU, there are many countries both Chopley Jnr and Mrs Chopley would love to see. (Mrs Chopley also has family in Italy, and she can also speak a fair bit of Spanish.)

So the European Disability Card would be great for that scenario, our daughter would have a card that we could be confident would be recognised in any EU country, and would guarantee her appropriate treatment and conditions in any EU country we travel to.

Except it won't of course. Because we won't be able to get one.

As I've said before, 'The Brexit Of Small Things', no overnight calamity, just a load of stuff getting slowly worse over time, the gradual decline of a once great country, as the rest of the EU leaves us in their rear view mirror.

 

[mack341]

I will answer your question mack but before I do so, goodness me, is this really where we're at? Remainers now have to demonstrate to Leavers what the EU are doing that the UK is missing out on? We never wanted this, we didn't vote for it, anyone who voted remain was literally saying, 'On balance we'll stick with how things are, it might not be perfect, but it seems better to us than the alternative, and we have been persuaded enough by those who know more about it than me that there is the potential for the UK to sustain real economic damage as the result of a Leave vote'.

I'm old enough to remember when Brexiteers were telling us Remoaner types what moaning minnies we were, how great Brexit would turn out to be, and to cry some more Remoaner tears. (In this very thread, in fact. Those people have gone rather quiet now.)

You have also phrased your question somewhat disingenuously, and moved the goalposts by asking for examples of some fresh 'good' things the EU is doing, rather than using the obvious starting position of what the UK has LOST by leaving in the first place. (Which is very well documented in this thread already, and is currently kicking the crap out of the entire UK economy, whilst we also now can't send asylum seekers back to France because we lost the Dublin Regulation.)

We lost a load of stuff when we left the EU, if we haven't replaced it with anything better, or at least as good, then by definition we're in a net loss position.

Anyway, the good news is we can see what the EU is up to on this website here, in a publicly available and searchable database (so far better than, for example, the secrecy and corruption behind how the UK government awarded its corrupt multi-billion pound PPE contracts for PPE that it ended up having to set fire to because it was so crap as to be unusable).

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

View attachment 176449

There's a lot there, but one that stood out to me immediately is this one, and I thought, 'What a splendid idea'. I appreciate this is a personal choice, but hopefully you can understand how it could be important to many other people.

(And by all means have a browse through, there's a lot of good stuff in there.)

View attachment 176450

Our daughter is disabled, she receives the highest component of Disability Living Allowance and Mrs Chopley is paid the full award of Carer's Allowance. We have tried travelling off island with her on three occasions now. It's a challenge, not least because her disability is 'invisible', we've had mixed experiences with the yellow and green disability lanyard she can wear to indicate she has an invisible disability, and we've all (including her) reached the conclusion that she can't do airports (or planes), it's too much for her.

As such, we've now got a plan to get a camper van and travel in that (probably still 4-5 years away from this point), so we can take our home with us, as it were. Avoid airports, not have to worry about provision/support at hotels, always have a safe quiet space, and so on.

Our intention is to try some trips to the UK first, and if successful, to travel further afield to the EU, there are many countries both Chopley Jnr and Mrs Chopley would love to see. (Mrs Chopley also has family in Italy, and she can also speak a fair bit of Spanish.)

So the European Disability Card would be great for that scenario, our daughter would have a card that we could be confident would be recognised in any EU country, and would guarantee her appropriate treatment and conditions in any EU country we travel to.

Except it won't of course. Because we won't be able to get one.

As I've said before, 'The Brexit Of Small Things', no overnight calamity, just a load of stuff getting slowly worse over time, the gradual decline of a once great country, as the rest of the EU leaves us in their rear view mirror.

That looks like a good idea from the EU there, no one disabled wants to have to continuously prove their condition or inability in order to get assistance etc...when out and about.

And a good idea re the camper van, one of our neighbours sold their VW recently for about 10k.

 

[pinnit2014]

Sexit:

Wet dreams for the SNP

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Webzcas]

The poll is based on a sample of less than 1,000 people, plus you link to The National, who no doubt will be running headlines supporting France tomorrow

Besides polls now are not relevant. Polls being run in 20 plus years time, when another referendum will likely be granted will be relevant.

 

[cncas2123]

Will park this one here to show the benefits of being part of the wonderful EU....

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Will park this one here to show the benefits of being part of the wonderful EU....

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

So a small number of people have done something wrong, they've been caught, and they're being punished for it. So they're doing better than we have in the UK with all the breathtakingly corrupt goings-on with Covid and PPE, which the Tories used to line the pockets of their friends and families with billions of pounds of UK taxpayer money. I'd like to see some arrests get made over that!

 

[cncas2123]

So a small number of people have done something wrong, they've been caught, and they're being punished for it. So they're doing better than we have in the UK with all the breathtakingly corrupt goings-on with Covid and PPE, which the Tories used to line the pockets of their friends and families with billions of pounds of UK taxpayer money. I'd like to see some arrests get made over that!

I am sure if there is wrong doing proven there will be arrests, just interesting that its people at the top level in the EU who have been caught with their hands in the till, I wonder how many below them are getting away with it....

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Lucky then that ropey imported carcasses were never really a thing whilst we were in the EU, with all them thorough vetting processes.

Like, I dunno, little inconveniences like the horse meat scandal of 2013. I take it we'd already left the EU by then?

I recently bought the book A DECADE IN TORY and as chance would have it, this is covered in the chapter for 2013.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

I must admit I only read as far as the headlines at the time of the horsemeat scandal, just having a read of the 2013 guardian article google gave me. Is it really just an Owen patterson idea though, cutting inspections and testing, or an idea that has been in govt for some time?

Surely one of the main benefits or ideas of the EU market is a level playing field of standards and safety and playing by the book?

 

[dunover]

Probably a few bent Eurocraps on the take, not Greeks this time?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I must admit I only read as far as the headlines at the time of the horsemeat scandal, just having a read of the 2013 guardian article google gave me. Is it really just an Owen patterson idea though, cutting inspections and testing, or an idea that has been in govt for some time?

Surely one of the main benefits or ideas of the EU market is a level playing field of standards and safety and playing by the book?


View attachment 177186

It was a failure of the EU standards of the time, which was readily acknowledged in the aftermath of the scandal and a number of new EU rules and safeguards were brought into place. (The Wikipedia article has loads of good information if you have a read of that.)

However, the UK had indeed gutted its own ability to check on what was being imported (which was still the responsibility of member states) which made us very vulnerable to the fraud and why we suffered the most (and indeed why it was discovered in Ireland, and not the UK).

No one's ever claimed the EU was/is perfect, it's a flawed organisation in many ways, always has been and it's never going to be perfect.

There's a strange dichotomy here, because on the one hand we hear BLOODY EU IMPOSING ALL THEIR RULES AND REGULATIONS ON US but the second anything goes wrong it's BLOODY EU WHY DIDN'T THEIR RULES AND REGULATIONS STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING, THEY SHOULD HAVE ENFORCED THEM DIRECTLY IN OUR COUNTRY.

The truth is the EU never imposed much of anything on us, which I covered here, over three and a half years ago - Brexit - whats the difference..... - Page 3 - Casinomeister Forum

And even where things are 'imposed' it was always our duty as a sovereign nation to look after ourselves, which we failed to when it came to the horsemeat scandal because the Tories had gutted our inspectorate capacity.

In the meantime if there are any Brexit benefits you'd like to share, please feel free to do so, because the months just keep on rolling and we'll soon be in 2023.

 

[pinnit2014]

Are we still pretending the referendum was just but a vote on immigration?

Had the 5th (?) ironic convo today re Scottish Indy and a Brexiteer: the actual quote, without a hint of irony, was 'financially, it makes no sense'

?

 

[mack341]

It was a failure of the EU standards of the time, which was readily acknowledged in the aftermath of the scandal and a number of new EU rules and safeguards were brought into place. (The Wikipedia article has loads of good information if you have a read of that.)

However, the UK had indeed gutted its own ability to check on what was being imported (which was still the responsibility of member states) which made us very vulnerable to the fraud and why we suffered the most (and indeed why it was discovered in Ireland, and not the UK).

No one's ever claimed the EU was/is perfect, it's a flawed organisation in many ways, always has been and it's never going to be perfect.

There's a strange dichotomy here, because on the one hand we hear BLOODY EU IMPOSING ALL THEIR RULES AND REGULATIONS ON US but the second anything goes wrong it's BLOODY EU WHY DIDN'T THEIR RULES AND REGULATIONS STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING, THEY SHOULD HAVE ENFORCED THEM DIRECTLY IN OUR COUNTRY.

The truth is the EU never imposed much of anything on us, which I covered here, over three and a half years ago - Brexit - whats the difference..... - Page 3 - Casinomeister Forum

And even where things are 'imposed' it was always our duty as a sovereign nation to look after ourselves, which we failed to when it came to the horsemeat scandal because the Tories had gutted our inspectorate capacity.

In the meantime if there are any Brexit benefits you'd like to share, please feel free to do so, because the months just keep on rolling and we'll soon be in 2023.

Well there is the ongoing benefit of not pressing a button and transferring 200 million sterling to brussels every week, what a relentless waste of money especially in trying times where the govt has to borrow to meet daily expenditure. You're paying for two governments to make laws when you need only 1.

If the boat crisis was solved with firm action, new paperwork and red tape for businesses examined, brexit would look a lot better. We'll have a foot in europe [as friendly neighbours] and global trade deals elsewhere.

 

[pinnit2014]

Tag this along with the SNP hatred thread - woohoo, another 1% onto Scottish Taxpayers, already more than English counterparts, to apparently 'fund the NHS' - an organisation in such dire need of major reform for decades, it's becoming laughable if it wasn't so tragic

Seemingly it's ok as anyone over 43k can 'afford it'

Meanwhile the National Care Centre, soon to be established at 500 million, is apparently not costed that well, nor has any tangible benefits.

Again, woohoo!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Well there is the ongoing benefit of not pressing a button and transferring 200 million sterling to brussels every week, what a relentless waste of money especially in trying times where the govt has to borrow to meet daily expenditure. You're paying for two governments to make laws when you need only 1.

If the boat crisis was solved with firm action, new paperwork and red tape for businesses examined, brexit would look a lot better. We'll have a foot in europe [as friendly neighbours] and global trade deals elsewhere.

It's a bolder man than me who's still going with the 'Brexit has been good for the UK economically' angle, because there is literally no evidence of any description, anywhere, to even remotely support that assertion (quite the opposite in fact), but hey, in the spirit of Christmas let's allow it to slide It is the time of year to believe in made up things like Santa Claus after all.

As for the boat crisis, what 'firm action' do you suggest? We're already proposing shipping them off to a dangerous African nation and that's not doing the job, and as we saw the other night with the tragic deaths when the dinghy sank, whatever the risks, the people will still try to come here. Short of literally deliberately sinking the boats in the channel (which they are prone to do anyway), what do you suggest? (And remember we had the Dublin Regulation when we were in the EU, which meant we could send many of them back to France, which we can't do now.)

And finally on the trade deals, c'mon mack, really? You think they wouldn't have started to happen by now if they were even remotely possible? At best we'll get whatever we'd have got in the EU, and possibly a lot worse. (As per Australia and New Zealand.)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

It's well known that Johnson wrote two articles about Brexit, one backing Leave, and one backing Remain. He went with Leave, backed Leave in the referendum campaign, and the rest is history. I'd never read the article he wrote for Remain until now, here it is.

(Remember, at the time Cameron was PM and he'd just come back from Europe having secured a number of concessions to British interests within the EU (the 'European Union deal' Johnson is referring to). As I've noted previously, contrary to popular and revisionist opinion, the EU used to do this all the time.)

Yes it's not exactly a forceful endorsement of the EU, but his conclusion is 'On balance, we're better off in because the benefits are substantial'.

There's a world where you can argue that this whole Brexit disaster started with what was, in essence, a flip of a coin. Without Johnson I don't think Leave would have got it over the line.

---- BORIS JOHNSON'S REMAIN ARTICLE ----

OK OK, I admit it. If you gave him a truth drug, or hypnotised him, I don't think even the prime minister would really deny it.

This European Union deal is not perhaps everything that we would have liked. It is not what we Eurosceptics were hoping, not when the process kicked off. We were hoping he was going to get really deep down and dirty, in the way that the Bloomberg speech seemed to indicate. He was going to probe the belly of the beast and bring back British sovereignty, like Hercules bringing Eurydice (sic) back from the underworld. I had the impression that this was going to be the beginning of a wholesale repatriation of powers - over fisheries, farming, the social chapter, border controls, you name it: all those political hostages joyfully returning home like the end of Raid on Entebbe.

It was going to be a moment for the ringing of church bells and bonfires on beacons, and union flags flying from every steeple, and peasants blind drunk on non-EU approved scrumpy and beating the hedgerows with staves while singing patriotic songs about Dave the hero.

I don't think we can pretend that this is how things have turned out. This is not a fundamental reform of Britain's position in the EU, and no-one could credibly claim it is.

It is not pointless; it is not wholly insignificant; it is by no means a waste of time. But it will not stop the great machine of EU integration, and it will not stop the production of ever more EU laws - at least some of which will have deleterious effects on the economy of this country and the rest of Europe.

Never mind the Tusk deal; look at the elephant in the room: the great beast still trampling happily on British parliamentary sovereignty, and British democracy. So there are likely to be a significant number of people - perhaps including you - who will feel that in all honour we can now only do one thing.

We said we wanted a reformed EU. We said that if we failed to get reform, then Britain could have a great future outside. We have not got a reformed EU - so: nothing for it, then - ho for the open seas! Viva Brexit! That would seem to be the logic, and yet I wonder if it is wholly correct.

Shut your eyes. Hold your breath. Think of Britain. Think of the rest of the EU. Think of the future. Think of the desire of your children and your grandchildren to live and work in other European countries; to sell things there, to make friends and perhaps to find partners there.

Ask yourself: despite all the defects and disappointments of this exercise - do you really, truly, definitely want Britain to pull out of the EU ? Now? This is a big thing to do, and there is certainly a strong political-philosophical imperative leading us to the door.

We are being outvoted ever more frequently. The ratchet of integration clicks remorselessly forward. More and more questions are now justiciable by the European Court of Justice, including that extraordinary document, the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. This bestows on every one of our 500m EU citizens a legally enforceable right to do all sorts of things across all 28 states: to start a business, to choose any occupation they like, to found any type of religious school, to enjoy "academic freedom". I shudder to think what is going to happen when UK citizens start vindicating these new "rights" in Luxembourg.

There is going to be more and more of this stuff ; and I can see why people might just think, to hell with it. I want out. I want to take back control of our democracy and our country.

If you feel that, I perfectly understand - because half the time I have been feeling that myself. And then the other half of the time, I have been thinking: hmmm. I like the sound of freedom; I like the sound of restoring democracy. But what are the downsides - and here we must be honest.

There are some big questions that the "out" side need to answer. Almost everyone expects there to be some sort of economic shock as a result of a Brexit. How big would it be? I am sure that the doomsters are exaggerating the fallout - but are they completely wrong? And how can we know?

And then there is the worry about Scotland, and the possibility that an English-only "leave" vote could lead to the break-up of the union. There is the Putin factor: we don't want to do anything to encourage more shirtless swaggering from the Russian leader, not in the Middle East, not anywhere.

And then there is the whole geostrategic anxiety. Britain is a great nation, a global force for good. It is surely a boon for the world and for Europe that she should be intimately engaged in the EU. This is a market on our doorstep, ready for further exploitation by British firms: the membership fee seems rather small for all that access.

Why are we so determined to turn our back on it? Shouldn't our policy be like our policy on cake - pro having it and pro eating it? Pro Europe and pro the rest of the world?

If sovereignty is the problem - and it certainly is - then maybe it is worth looking again at the prime minister's deal, because there is a case for saying it is not quite as contemptible as all that. He is the first prime minister to get us out of ever closer union, which is potentially very important with the European Court of Justice and how it interprets EU law. He has some good stuff on competition, and repealing legislation, and on protecting Britain from further integration of the euro group.

Now if this were baked into a real EU treaty, it would be very powerful. Taken together with the sovereignty clauses - which are not wholly platitudinous - you can see the outlines of a new role for Britain: friendly, involved, but not part of the federalist project.

Yes, folks, the deal's a bit of a dud, but it contains the germ of something really good. I am going to muffle my disappointment and back the prime minister.

 

[mack341]

It's a bolder man than me who's still going with the 'Brexit has been good for the UK economically' angle, because there is literally no evidence of any description, anywhere, to even remotely support that assertion (quite the opposite in fact), but hey, in the spirit of Christmas let's allow it to slide It is the time of year to believe in made up things like Santa Claus after all.

As for the boat crisis, what 'firm action' do you suggest? We're already proposing shipping them off to a dangerous African nation and that's not doing the job, and as we saw the other night with the tragic deaths when the dinghy sank, whatever the risks, the people will still try to come here. Short of literally deliberately sinking the boats in the channel (which they are prone to do anyway), what do you suggest? (And remember we had the Dublin Regulation when we were in the EU, which meant we could send many of them back to France, which we can't do now.)

And finally on the trade deals, c'mon mack, really? You think they wouldn't have started to happen by now if they were even remotely possible? At best we'll get whatever we'd have got in the EU, and possibly a lot worse. (As per Australia and New Zealand.)

Corporation tax is 19% of profit [afaik] therefore to fund this weekly additional £200 million from the govt's coffers you'd need to see around an extra £50 billion profit not revenue from EU trade that somehow we cannot access via the free trade deal we signed up to.

Then there are the additional costs to uk services - nhs, housing, education, benefits, policing created by the free movement law within the EU, it's not cost free or neutral. What is raised by an individual's income tax in a low paid job is unlikely to cover all these other costs, incl for the dependants/family. I'm sure highly skilled europeans can still live and work here, in the pharma or education system for example.

Immigration is a moot point, any recent arrivals from outside of europe that gained national citizenship in any EU country could freely move to the uk if the desire arose - as far as I understand how the system operated, I could be wrong there may be a time limit that they had to be resident in their host nation before moving again etc...

To conclude it is clear cut, the benefits being in outweigh being out by a huge margin, is very debatable, putting aside the sovereignty angle [which mrs krankie north of the border is fighting tooth and nail to attain - only then to propose giving it all away to her comrades in the EU].

Germany, the engine of the EU, no longer has access to cheap gas for its manufacturing industries, that's going to have an effect on GDP and growth etc...the future and which model you live under is best [eu or non eu] is not certain and cast in stone. Are the southern european members going to receive as much help as previously from the wealthier north?

 

[mack341]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

FRANKFURT, Dec 15 (Reuters) - Germany is bleeding cash to keep the lights on. Almost half a trillion dollars, and counting, since the Ukraine war jolted it into an energy crisis nine months ago.

That's the cumulative scale of the bailouts and schemes the Berlin government has launched to prop up the country's energy system since prices rocketed and it lost access to gas from main supplier Russia, according to Reuters calculations.

"How severe this crisis will be and how long it will last greatly depends on how the energy crisis will develop," said Michael Groemling at the German Economic Institute (IW).

"The national economy as a whole is facing a huge loss of wealth."

That equates to about 1.5 billion euros a day since Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24. Or around 12% of national economic output. Or about 5,400 euros for each person in Germany.

Europe's preeminent economy, long a byword for prudent planning, now finds itself at the mercy of the weather. Energy rationing is a risk in the event of a long cold spell this winter, Germany's first in half a century without Russian gas.

"The German economy is now in a very critical phase because the future of energy supply is more uncertain than ever," said Stefan Kooths, vice president and research director business cycles and growth at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

"Where does the German economy stand? If we look at price inflation, it has a high fever."

------------

I don't post this with glee as we're getting shafted as well, and I'm sure Germany will eventually solve their energy problems but the fallout will affect the EU, maybe it will have to become more cost-conscious and less ambitious regarding the federal EU project.

 

[mack341]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

It's still unclear if the €200 billion scheme will fall into the category of state aid. If it does, it will have to be examined and approved by Brussels before its implementation.

State aid refers to an advantage given to selected individuals or companies by public authorities, usually in the form of subsidies. This makes it harder for other businesses to compete.

German companies that are shielded from crippling gas bills could gain an upper hand against other European businesses that are forced to cut costs, limit production or shut down. The massive burrowing could trigger a subsidy race among member states and exacerbate debt levels, analysts warn.

"I see a great risk of fragmentation because the €200 billion subsidy is basically a huge amount of money that creates large advantages for German companies and consumers that other countries cannot provide," Philipp Lausberg, a policy analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC), told Euronews.

"There is a competitive advantage for German companies that goes against the spirit of the single market."

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Corporation tax is 19% of profit [afaik] therefore to fund this weekly additional £200 million from the govt's coffers you'd need to see around an extra £50 billion profit not revenue from EU trade that somehow we cannot access via the free trade deal we signed up to.

Then there are the additional costs to uk services - nhs, housing, education, benefits, policing created by the free movement law within the EU, it's not cost free or neutral. What is raised by an individual's income tax in a low paid job is unlikely to cover all these other costs, incl for the dependants/family. I'm sure highly skilled europeans can still live and work here, in the pharma or education system for example.

Immigration is a moot point, any recent arrivals from outside of europe that gained national citizenship in any EU country could freely move to the uk if the desire arose - as far as I understand how the system operated, I could be wrong there may be a time limit that they had to be resident in their host nation before moving again etc...

To conclude it is clear cut, the benefits being in outweigh being out by a huge margin, is very debatable, putting aside the sovereignty angle [which mrs krankie north of the border is fighting tooth and nail to attain - only then to propose giving it all away to her comrades in the EU].

Germany, the engine of the EU, no longer has access to cheap gas for its manufacturing industries, that's going to have an effect on GDP and growth etc...the future and which model you live under is best [eu or non eu] is not certain and cast in stone. Are the southern european members going to receive as much help as previously from the wealthier north?

But literally no one agrees with you mack, (well, unless we're going down the loony tunes BriefingsForBritain route), I note you haven't cited any sources for your assertions for the simple reason that none exist. No credible economic analysis of Brexit has concluded anything other than it has been a financial disaster for the UK.

This is the reason even the most ardent of cheerleaders for Brexit, such as The Telegraph and The Mail are going down the route of finding who to blame for it all going wrong, because there is literally nothing they can point at that Brexit has made better, including economically.

Having an opinion about something is fine, but just making stuff up that suits your narrative is a different kettle of fish.

As for all the other stuff about Germany, I fail to see its relevance, 'other countries in the world are facing their own unique problems' doesn't equal 'Brexit was a good idea then'.

If it's doing stuff with subsidies that is against EU rules then yes, I would expect that to be analysed robustly and action taken if deemed appropriate, that's what a rules-based system is for.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Decent article about the sense of Brexit Betrayal in the Red Wall.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

But literally no one agrees with you mack, (well, unless we're going down the loony tunes BriefingsForBritain route), I note you haven't cited any sources for your assertions for the simple reason that none exist. No credible economic analysis of Brexit has concluded anything other than it has been a financial disaster for the UK.

This is the reason even the most ardent of cheerleaders for Brexit, such as The Telegraph and The Mail are going down the route of finding who to blame for it all going wrong, because there is literally nothing they can point at that Brexit has made better, including economically.

Having an opinion about something is fine, but just making stuff up that suits your narrative is a different kettle of fish.

As for all the other stuff about Germany, I fail to see its relevance, 'other countries in the world are facing their own unique problems' doesn't equal 'Brexit was a good idea then'.

If it's doing stuff with subsidies that is against EU rules then yes, I would expect that to be analysed robustly and action taken if deemed appropriate, that's what a rules-based system is for.

Where am I wrong on those figures then, or is this a discussion where unless or until the same argument has been made in the msm it can't be made here?

I was strictly basing my argument on the extra uk-eu trade required to provide that £200 million out of the govt's tax revenue, 'we're missing out on 100bn trade' doesn't equate to £50 billion profit by the time corporation tax is calculated.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Where am I wrong on those figures then, or is this a discussion where unless or until the same argument has been made in the msm it can't be made here?

I was strictly basing my argument on the extra uk-eu trade required to provide that £200 million out of the govt's tax revenue, 'we're missing out on 100bn trade' doesn't equate to £50 billion profit by the time corporation tax is calculated.

The problem is mack you're running on the assumption that the UK just 'gave' the EU a load of money and got absolutely nothing in return for it.

Now there's definitely a conversation to be had about how big the EU's budget had got and what it was spending it on, but it's also not true that we didn't get anything for our contributions.

Single simple example, but honestly, there are loads of these.

Chemical regulations. This all used to be handled for us by the EU, there's a unified regime across the EU for chemical standards, regulations, usage rules and so on. Now presumably we can agree that chemicals need to be regulated, because whilst they're incredibly useful, they can also be incredibly dangerous, to the point of lethality.

Once we were out of transition we were no longer covered by this, so we then had to come up with our own chemical database and regulation system, (which, surprise surprise, ends up closely following what the EU does anyway, because it'd be stupid to do anything else).

And how much has that cost the UK chemical industry so far? Back in July it was put at two billion quid, and rising.

So you get the idea, straight away we can deduct two billion quid from the figure that we 'lost' in EU contributions, because the EU was spending some of the money we gave it on doing the chemical regulation job for us.

Like I said, single example, there are many, many more. (Many of which I've already documented in this thread!)

 

[mack341]

Fair enough I understand this, going it alone has new costs, but some could be upfront in the main rather than continuous high expenditure.

More trade is the main argument made for rejoining, on my point that has to get over a certain hurdle to even pay the EU membership fee, and it has not been fully examined why the free trade deal [and red tape paperwork] is causing so much friction as to wipe out substantial amounts of trade. [pre-existing]

If the govt do all the analysis and the answer remains a huge loss of trade is inevitable, no improvements to the paperwork/red tape can be made, then that is a point for going back in.

But you'd still have the sovereignty issues [ the EU will continue to evolve, so you don't know entirely what you are signing up to ] and problems from an expanding population stretching public services.

All the other members, apart from the ones that kept their own currency, will struggle to be able to leave now, whereas we always had a bit more leeway. They cannot adjust their currency etc.. to navigate these difficult times, it's a one size policy decided by the ECB which must fit all, what suits france and germany, netherlands must also suit Greece and portugal etc... edit: that said they're protected from having a national currency crash.

 

[pinnit2014]

Fair enough I understand this, going it alone has new costs, but some could be upfront in the main rather than continuous high expenditure.

More trade is the main argument made for rejoining, on my point that has to get over a certain hurdle to even pay the EU membership fee, and it has not been fully examined why the free trade deal [and red tape paperwork] is causing so much friction as to wipe out substantial amounts of trade. [pre-existing]

If the govt do all the analysis and the answer remains a huge loss of trade is inevitable, no improvements to the paperwork/red tape can be made, then that is a point for going back in.

But you'd still have the sovereignty issues [ the EU will continue to evolve, so you don't know entirely what you are signing up to ] and problems from an expanding population stretching public services.

All the other members, apart from the ones that kept their own currency, will struggle to be able to leave now, whereas we always had a bit more leeway. They cannot adjust their currency etc.. to navigate these difficult times, it's a one size policy decided by the ECB which must fit all, what suits france and germany, netherlands must also suit Greece and portugal etc... edit: that said they're protected from having a national currency crash.

That is the not so inconspicuous elephant in the room - i get a bit tired about reading and hearing about how 'increased funding' will sort out the public services - they won't. They might patch it for a bit but that's about it. Proper reform, root analysis, is needed throughout all public services but no one wants to touch it ( maybe because any benefits from it won't be seen in an election term)

Not helped by the lack of transparency in funding: you will see the Govt saying: we've gave an extra 200m! But when you speak to the DoF's of LA's/public bodies you'll be told it's not extra, it doesn't even cover the current demands as a lot is ring fenced. So i suppose a mix of reform and a re-calculation of funding based in current/future trends is required.

 

[mack341]

More truth and sense from the briefings for britain website:

There have also been recent attempts to discredit the UK’s trade policy. Ex-agriculture minister George Eustice recently made claims about the UK’s trade deals with Australia and New Zealand which are basically nonsensical, as Briefings for Britain has pointed out elsewhere. And the Guardian recently ran a story branding the UK’s trade deal with Japan a flop, with trade having supposedly ‘slumped’ since it was signed. Leaving aside the fact that deal only came into force in early 2021, was quite modest in scope, and that trade flows have obviously been affected by the pandemic, the numbers in the article were also out of date and wrong. In Q3 2022, goods trade between the UK and Japan totalled £3.8 billion, up from £3.3 billion in the final quarter of 2020. For services data, the latest figures, for Q2, show bilateral trade of £3.0 billion up from £2.9 billion in Q4 2020.

The pattern that emerges from all of this is of supposed experts abandoning all pretence at objectivity and engaging instead in pure propaganda, using misleading data or contentious modelling techniques to establish dubious ‘facts’ and making lurid claims over and over again in the hope that people will believe them.

We should expect this continue, for two reasons. First, the new UK government shows little or no sign of pushing back against such claims – unsurprising given that it has a distinct Remainer bent. Second, the UK economy is heading for a recession, made worse by excessive fiscal and monetary tightening. This recession will be a glorious opportunity for Remainers to blame Brexit for the unfortunate consequences it will bring with it such as rising unemployment and falling asset prices. The fact that recessions will also be occurring elsewhere, with similar unpleasant consequences, will be ignored.

The endgame for Remainers is clear. To discredit Brexit sufficiently in the eyes of the public that a process of gradual rejoining of the EU can be safely started. How this is achieved is apparently immaterial. It appears not to matter to the likes of Carney and others that they are dragging the already tattered reputation of the economics profession still further through the mud to achieve their political goals, reducing the profession to little more than a rabble of propagandists for hire.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

More truth and sense from the briefings for britain website:

There have also been recent attempts to discredit the UK’s trade policy. Ex-agriculture minister George Eustice recently made claims about the UK’s trade deals with Australia and New Zealand which are basically nonsensical, as Briefings for Britain has pointed out elsewhere. And the Guardian recently ran a story branding the UK’s trade deal with Japan a flop, with trade having supposedly ‘slumped’ since it was signed. Leaving aside the fact that deal only came into force in early 2021, was quite modest in scope, and that trade flows have obviously been affected by the pandemic, the numbers in the article were also out of date and wrong. In Q3 2022, goods trade between the UK and Japan totalled £3.8 billion, up from £3.3 billion in the final quarter of 2020. For services data, the latest figures, for Q2, show bilateral trade of £3.0 billion up from £2.9 billion in Q4 2020.

The pattern that emerges from all of this is of supposed experts abandoning all pretence at objectivity and engaging instead in pure propaganda, using misleading data or contentious modelling techniques to establish dubious ‘facts’ and making lurid claims over and over again in the hope that people will believe them.

We should expect this continue, for two reasons. First, the new UK government shows little or no sign of pushing back against such claims – unsurprising given that it has a distinct Remainer bent. Second, the UK economy is heading for a recession, made worse by excessive fiscal and monetary tightening. This recession will be a glorious opportunity for Remainers to blame Brexit for the unfortunate consequences it will bring with it such as rising unemployment and falling asset prices. The fact that recessions will also be occurring elsewhere, with similar unpleasant consequences, will be ignored.

The endgame for Remainers is clear. To discredit Brexit sufficiently in the eyes of the public that a process of gradual rejoining of the EU can be safely started. How this is achieved is apparently immaterial. It appears not to matter to the likes of Carney and others that they are dragging the already tattered reputation of the economics profession still further through the mud to achieve their political goals, reducing the profession to little more than a rabble of propagandists for hire.

Bloody Remainers, I knew it was their fault all along! I am glad BREIEFINGSFORBRITAIN have put me right on that.

So our timeline now is:

1) Leave wins referendum
2) UK leaves EU
3) It turns out to be a load of shit on every conceivable metric
4) Remoaners are to blame for everything including the fact the thing they never wanted to start with is crap

Even if we accept the figures being used in the article above, just for the sake of argument, we're talking about trade improvements in the low hundreds of millions, versus the tens upon tens of billions of trade we've lost with the EU. (And lest we forget that the UK's trade deal with Japan is essentially a copy and paste of the EU's trade deal with Japan, which we'd have got anyway if we were an EU member.)

 

[mack341]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Italian ministers lashed out at the European Central Bank on Friday, labelling as "baffling" and "crazy" a decision to hike borrowing costs that raised the financial pressure on one of the euro zone's most indebted countries.

Three senior ministers took aim after the ECB on Thursday, raised its benchmark rate by 50 basis points as widely expected, and signalled further increases ahead while laying out plans to reduce its bond purchases.

Defence Minister Guido Crosetto, a close ally of Meloni and co-founder of her Brothers of Italy party, said on Twitter that raising interest rates "makes no sense" and called the ECB's move to start winding down its sovereign bond purchases "crazy."

On Thursday Crosetto, alongside a chart showing a widening of the gap between German and Italian borrowing costs, sarcastically thanked ECB President Christine Lagarde for her "Christmas present" of higher rates.


-----------

Italy is a key eu member state, I think their govt is going to have to make cuts to pay for this increase in interest payments, and when the notes in your wallet are all euros you're going to place a certain amount of responsibility on the issuer [the ECB] if they lose value. The EU needs its export trade with the uk not to diminish, a lot of poverty and austerity will breed anti EU sentiment.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

'Sunlit uplands'

Come on then Nigel, fuck off then.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Oh hang on it's the government's fault. Nothing to do with Brexit and Nigel. The government.

Always someone else's fault you see.

Honestly, he's such an absolutely fucking unashamed grifter. A pure conman through and through.

 

[dunover]

For the record, for the sixth consecutive Christmas since Brexit vote, I have found plentiful and ready supplies of everything on the seasonal food menu.

Pigs-in-blankets, sprouts, tubs of chocs, swede, cauliflower, beef, eggs, turkey, ham, gammon, cheese bites, cheeses from several nations, prosecco, Xmas pudding, mince pies, butter, dips, Viennetta, carrots, broccoli, cucumber, tomatoes, crackers, sausage rolls, cakes, various potato crisp products etc.

One supermarket shop, 2 ton spent, piece of piss.

I'm sure it's the same on the Isle of Moan too.

All against impossible odds as @ChopleyIOM should be aware of. ????????????

 

[ChopleyIOM]

That's amazing dunover, because 'being able to go shopping' definitely wasn't a thing before Brexit set us free from the shackles of EU tyranny!

 

[mack341]

Yep no obvious shortages of anything to my eye, it must be the same in the EU, if there is a demand for uk produced shortbread biscuits or scottish smoked salmon, say, then their supermarket will sell it. That's the consumer side of things.

Then you have business to business side, they will do what they have to do based on their interests, some new paperwork is not going to stop them buying from british sources they have up until now relied upon, firms build up relationships with others, based on things like trust & reliability etc...

Because how else would they also trade with the rest of the world, paperwork is required. In the EU you don't need paperwork at the back end because you've ticked all the boxes and rules in the front end, so unlikely to be a cost saving.

All these 'reports and studies' saying billions of trade is being missed out on, never give any solid examples or sectors, the best they can come up with is some bespoke maker of scones or ice cream who are struggling with the paperwork or the EU customs people are deliberately shafting them by holding up their perishable goods in transit.

 

[interlog]

For the record, for the sixth consecutive Christmas since Brexit vote, I have found plentiful and ready supplies of everything on the seasonal food menu.

Pigs-in-blankets, sprouts, tubs of chocs, swede, cauliflower, beef, eggs, turkey, ham, gammon, cheese bites, cheeses from several nations, prosecco, Xmas pudding, mince pies, butter, dips, Viennetta, carrots, broccoli, cucumber, tomatoes, crackers, sausage rolls, cakes, various potato crisp products etc.

One supermarket shop, 2 ton spent, piece of piss.

I'm sure it's the same on the Isle of Moan too.

All against impossible odds as @ChopleyIOM should be aware of. ????????????

Working for a supermarket myself, specifically the distribution side of it, we again this year didn't have a shortage of drivers. As a matter of fact we had a surplus of drivers.

Brexit and the driver shortage hey!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I'm old enough to remember when Brexit was going to make loads of stuff better because it was brilliant. Instead we appear to have ended up with 'Brexit is great because not everything has turned to total shit'.

Just remember that all that amazing, checks notes...... erm, shopping you can do, costs 6% more than it would have done without Brexit.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

And the thing is, for every 'I WENT SHOPPING AND BOUGHT SOME SPROUTS' good news Brexit story (lol), there's one like this.

Still, at least dunover has his cheese bites.