Brexit - whats the difference.....

[mack341]

I disagree to some extant I think you will see people helping out neighbours etc..during the 2nd world war when it's accepted a greater community spirit existed, the Govt still rationed food to stop the scenes we've witnessed. Tbh I don't know what they had in the way of toilet paper in those days and whether that was rationed as well.

Also many other countries have also had the supermarket hoarders, so it's not a unique failing by us.

This clip below is a lot to do with it, extreme capitalism [greed is good] relies on a dog eat dog mindset, and that's the way we started to move in the 80's [a decade which I enjoyed as a child but not sure many adults who experienced redundancy and job insecurity did etc..] then you had the 90's with the tech boom, then years of war and terrorism fears, 2008 crash and a zombie economy trudging on. Education has been dumbed down for the masses deliberately all through these years.



I cannot see what this virus pandemic has to do with reversing brexit, I have no problem extending the transition period as long as the EU don't try to apply terms and make it conditional upon us giving them something, it's just a mutual benefit for both sides to extend the time for talks, while this virus emergency is prioritised.

 

[pinnit2014]

British people pulling together in times of crisis and helping thy fellow neighbour is a myth. People today are more egocentric than at any other point in history. So Bojo and the likes doing their best war-time speech and 'plucky' British optimism routine is utter BS

But what about 'British Values', did we not create a list of them at one point?

Not wishing to be misanthropic but folk are generally quite 'do unto others', help your fellow man etc, until the chips are down. Then it's Mad Max.

Even last week - one of the neighbours husbands died and the arseholes next door were going ape: me and Mrs P went round and chapped their door to just let them know what had happened and they might want to put a lid on it. Result? Called a wanker and door slammed in face. Charming.

More worrying is Mrs, gleefully, yesterday telling me 'Look, they got a new car.....'

Fantastic - now going to have the perjure myself as to her location between the hours of 9pm-9.15pm tonight probably.

 

[dunover]

Do to others as they do unto you - then fuck-off before the Police arrive.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Brits stepping up to the plate in a time of crisis! Or the other one, where we've had to fly in planes full of Romanians to pick fruit and veg.....

Doesn't bode well for a hard Brexit scenario......

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

 

[goatwack]

Goddamit. If only those pesky Brexiteers had had the sense to foresee a ruinous pandemic that set countries back five years. Tsk!

 

[Slottery]

Same problem in Finland, huge troubles when these high skilled and experienced Ukrainian workers can't get in country. It's risking country to be self-sufficient in food production

(one could wonder how much you can count on foreign workers when something exceptional like pandemia or war happens, loads of money to paid for all these farmers to keep food production self-sufficient in case of some of these risks happen but it's all fcked up if Ukrainian and other foreign people can't come over to work...)

Loads of complaining that would need to hire double amount of Finns to do same amount of work which of course is bit more expensive. Could imagine that in UK as well there are quite many people available for seasonal work who lost their jobs temporarily or permanently or is it same problem that they are not that highly skilled to pick berries?

 

[Harry_BKK]

April 20, 2020

Having something like 140,000 UK workers apply for farm work only to be ignored in favour of flying in 40,000 from Eastern Europe then having the media calling UK workers lazy is so consistant with our honest and open governments.Not to mention all things virus related.

April 21, 2020

Coincidentally found this in a different news story but I am sure we can apply the same to any Western country be it the UK, Germany etc.

View attachment 128820

April 22, 2020

How can you possible put that forward as an excuse for what is happening today when millions are out of work in this country and at least 3 times as many applied that where required?
You really do clutch at straws Harry in an attempt to win a point

April 30, 2020

Brits stepping up to the plate in a time of crisis! Or the other one, where we've had to fly in planes full of Romanians to pick fruit and veg.....

Doesn't bode well for a hard Brexit scenario......

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

View attachment 129900

 

[sufferinsilence]

Thanks to @goatwack for pointing me in this direction. I saw this popping up on Twitter yesterday and thought about posting it but then trailed off watching cute vids of corgi's.

The problem with those jobs isn't only ( ) that Brits are lazy but that most of them include room and board. So you'd have a very low paying job and would have to live at or near the farms to fully take advantage of it.

Question is: are farmers willing to pay more for British workers?

 

[Harry_BKK]

The problem with those jobs isn't only ( ) that Brits are lazy but that most of them include room and board. So you'd have a very low paying job and would have to live at or near the farms to fully take advantage of it.

Question is: are farmers willing to pay more for British workers?

Question is: are people willing to pay more for vegetables and fruits?

 

[pinnit2014]

Question is: are people willing to pay more for vegetables and fruits?

Lived in Scotland for 10 years so you’ll need to enlighten me.

What are they exactly?

 

[mack341]

Question is: are people willing to pay more for vegetables and fruits?

Harry do you not think the tescos and walmarts of this world could not also trim their margins? How much do they pay a farmer for a cucumber or lettuce and how much do they charge the consumer?

Just seen this in on the news wires, not sure of the full significance though:

"German court criticises European Central Bank crisis bond-buying"
bbc:

Germany's top court has ruled that the European Central Bank's mass bond-buying to stabilise the eurozone partly violates the German constitution.

The ruling relates to government debt worth €2.1 trillion (£2tn; $2.3tn) bought by the ECB since 2015, but not purchases in the coronavirus crisis.

The Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe says there is not enough German political oversight in the purchases.

Germany's Bundesbank carries the most weight in the ECB's decisions.

Later the EU's executive appeared to play down the ruling, by stressing that EU law takes precedence.

"Notwithstanding the analysis of the decision of the German Constitutional Court today, we reaffirm the primacy of EU law," said European Commission spokesman Eric Mamer.

--------
talk about arrogance and sovereignty, I'm sure the german court studied the EU law as well before making their decision, I wonder if the EU or the ECB fought the case??

 

[mack341]

A bit more from the politico website on this ruling:

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

Central to the court’s argument is a contention that in pursuing the bond-buying program, the ECB failed to take the wider economic impact of the policy into account, focusing instead on its mandate to keep inflation in check. One of the effects of the ECB's bond-buying has been to depress interest rates across the eurozone, which has delivered a blow to savers and institutions that rely on regular interest income to fund themselves, such as life insurers and charitable foundations.

In an effort to stabilize the eurozone economy during the debt crisis, the ECB, following the lead of other global central banks, began purchasing eurozone debt, a policy known as quantitative easing. Since 2015, it has acquired nearly €3 trillion of debt on the open market issued by all eurozone countries, pledging to hold on to the bonds until they mature.

Some worry that the ruling effectively neuters the ECB, blunting the famous declaration made by then-president Mario Draghi in 2012 to do “whatever it takes” to save the euro. That's because the decision makes clear that the central bank doesn’t have carte blanche to follow through on Draghi's pledge.

---------
from bloomberg:

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

The German court said the EU judges’

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

that QE was in line with EU rules was “objectively arbitrary” and is “methodologically no longer justifiable.” It gave the ECB a three-month

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

to fix flaws in the measure.

The ruling is a direct challenge to the supremacy of the EU judges, whose rulings are binding across the 27-nation bloc. The German court said this no longer applies in extreme examples when the EU tribunal fails in its duties.

The bigger issue is that the ruling has opened a Pandora’s box on the EU legal order, said Guntram Wolff, director of the Brussels-based Bruegel think tank.

Calling an ECJ judgment “ultra vires,” or going beyond one’s legal powers, “is a huge issue for the integrity of EU law,” Wolff said in an email. “Every national court can now challenge the EU court by saying what the German court is doing, is also applicable to us.”

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry do you not think the tescos and walmarts of this world could not also trim their margins? How much do they pay a farmer for a cucumber or lettuce and how much do they charge the consumer?

Just seen this in on the news wires, not sure of the full significance though:

"German court criticises European Central Bank crisis bond-buying"
bbc:

Germany's top court has ruled that the European Central Bank's mass bond-buying to stabilise the eurozone partly violates the German constitution.

The ruling relates to government debt worth €2.1 trillion (£2tn; $2.3tn) bought by the ECB since 2015, but not purchases in the coronavirus crisis.

The Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe says there is not enough German political oversight in the purchases.

Germany's Bundesbank carries the most weight in the ECB's decisions.

Later the EU's executive appeared to play down the ruling, by stressing that EU law takes precedence.

"Notwithstanding the analysis of the decision of the German Constitutional Court today, we reaffirm the primacy of EU law," said European Commission spokesman Eric Mamer.

--------
talk about arrogance and sovereignty, I'm sure the german court studied the EU law as well before making their decision, I wonder if the EU or the ECB fought the case??

What exactly is your gripe mack?

The German Supreme Court did not declare the PSPP program illegal. The main complaint is that the ECB and with that also the German Bundesbank have not shown proper justification for the program, which they can do now within 3 months.

And yes, EU law takes precedence but that does not mean it cannot be challenged. It's called democracy mack, not autocracy. Every country can and does challenge EU courts. Nothing new, and nothing surprising.

I actually welcome the ruling as the quantitive easing nonsense has been overdone in the name of "indefinite growth no matter what". And that is not just the EU.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry do you not think the tescos and walmarts of this world could not also trim their margins? How much do they pay a farmer for a cucumber or lettuce and how much do they charge the consumer?

Supermarket chains work usually with a 5-10% overall gross profit margin, if that much. How much should they cut in your view?

Maybe the workers, the truck drivers, and everyone else in the supply chain should suffer a cut in their wages too then? Because supermarket companies are job-intensive businesses as you need lots of people from procurement, warehousing and the supermarkets itself, e.g. Tesco's has roughly 500K employees.

Farmers get peanuts for a cucumber or lettuce and without the government/EU subsidies they probably would not survive, well, at least most of the small and medium farmers.

However, the drive and pressure for lower and lower prices come mainly from the consumer because we are not prepared to pay 10 cents more (or whatever that would be) for a cucumber at Tesco's and will spend 2 pounds on petrol to drive to a Lidl and buy it there.

 

[pinnit2014]

Supermarket chains work usually with a 5-10% overall gross profit margin, if that much. How much should they cut in your view?

Maybe the workers, the truck drivers, and everyone else in the supply chain should suffer a cut in their wages too then? Because supermarket companies are job-intensive businesses as you need lots of people from procurement, warehousing and the supermarkets itself, e.g. Tesco's has roughly 500K employees.

Farmers get peanuts for a cucumber or lettuce and without the government/EU subsidies thee probably would not survive, well, at least most of the small and medium farmers.

However, the drive and pressure for lower and lower prices comes mainly from the consumer.

View attachment 130501

Tesco have such a flawless record in presenting a true and fair view of their accounts as well

Wonder what % is propped up by horse burgers?

 

[Harry_BKK]

Tesco have such a flawless record in presenting a true and fair view of their accounts as well

Wonder what % is propped up by horse burgers?

Well, take then the largest German group called REWE with some 360K employees. Their gross profit margin in 2018 was roughly 9% as per their audited and published report.

 

[mack341]

What exactly is your gripe mack?

The German Supreme Court did not declare the PSPP program illegal. The main complaint is that the ECB and with that also the German Bundesbank have not shown proper justification for the program, which they can do now within 3 months.

And yes, EU law takes precedence but that does not mean it cannot be challenged. It's called democracy mack, not autocracy. Every country can and does challenge EU courts. Nothing new, and nothing surprising.

I actually welcome the ruling as the quantitive easing nonsense has been overdone in the name of "indefinite growth no matter what". And that is not just the EU.

Can you point to me to some other cases where the top court of a member state has ruled against the EU judges decision? [ The ECJ ]

what is your gripe with me posting the articles, perhaps I should've separated them from the fruit and veg post, and not linked them

 

[mack341]

From the Financial Times:

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

"The German court, which is based in Karlsruhe, also stunned lawyers and legal scholars by casting aside a 2018 ruling by the European Court of Justice that ECB bond-buying was legal. It is the first time a national court has declared an ECJ judgment as invalid and could undermine the uniform application of EU law, one of the bloc’s most important achievements."

 

[Harry_BKK]

Can you point to me to some other cases where the top court of a member state has ruled against the EU judges decision? [ The ECJ ]

what is your gripe with me posting the articles, perhaps I should've separated them from the fruit and veg post, and not linked them

I was asking about your gripe as to what are you trying to say with your post. You can of course post anything you like. My question is just what did you try to point out?

 

[Harry_BKK]

From the Financial Times:

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

"The German court, which is based in Karlsruhe, also stunned lawyers and legal scholars by casting aside a 2018 ruling by the European Court of Justice that ECB bond-buying was legal. It is the first time a national court has declared an ECJ judgment as invalid and could undermine the uniform application of EU law, one of the bloc’s most important achievements."

They did not declare it invalid, no matter how happy that would make you, mack.

They declared it non-binding should the ECB not provide sufficient justification for the PSPP program for which they were given 3 months to do. They came to the conclusion that there wasn't sufficient justification shown in 2014 and the ECJ judgement sided differently. The German court judged according to German Constitutional Law.

Let it be the first case, which it is not, see e.g. Poland. It will set then maybe a precedent on how these things will be settled in the future. That is what you do in a democracy mack.

 

[mack341]

I was asking about your gripe as to what are you trying to say with your post. You can of course post anything you like. My question is just what did you try to point out?

I did write "Just seen this in on the news wires, not sure of the full significance though:"

The articles spoke for themselves, a bit of a power struggle could be on the cards, national debt isn't an issue that is going to go away anytime soon, the southern member states have a lot more than the richer northern members but the EU rules seem to forbid the ECB from financing countries.

Austerity is going to fuel more EU scepticism in the southern countries, so to avoid this their govt debt is likely to have to grow and more QE required. Some articles I see suggest the euro be split into two zones or other solutions for more flexibility.

The future for the EU does not look as certain as before in the early 2000's, it looks like major reform will be required somewhere to keep the EU federal project afloat.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I did write "Just seen this in on the news wires, not sure of the full significance though:"

The articles spoke for themselves, a bit of a power struggle could be on the cards, national debt isn't an issue that is going to go away anytime soon, the southern member states have a lot more than the richer northern members but the EU rules seem to forbid the ECB from financing countries.

Austerity is going to fuel more EU scepticism in the southern countries, so to avoid this their govt debt is likely to have to grow and more QE required. Some articles I see suggest the euro be split into two zones or other solutions for more flexibility.

The future for the EU does not look as certain as before in the early 2000's, it looks like major reform will be required somewhere to keep the EU federal project afloat.

QE was always controversial, I am not a fan of it either (but then I am only an amateur at these things, and a very insignificant voice). It was pretty clear that someone would not let it go, that it is this time the Germans is good because the country has a lot of weight in the EU.

Personally, I welcome the struggle as well as the judgement from the German court. Let them hammer it out, can only be good.

The ECB has been buying debt in amounts that make no sense anymore. EUR2.1 trillion and that during a non-crisis period because growth and inflation were not high enough. They restarted doing it at the end of 2019, the total stands now at 2.2 trillion. What the hell are countries doing with their finances that they are in such dire need for someone to take their debt off them when the economy is doing fairly well? What would be the maximum mark in a crisis? 10 trillion, indefinite?

Please stop with this "future of the EU" malarkey mack. The EU is here to stay but will never be 100% perfect and there will be always mongerers&supporters. The EU has evolved ever since it was created, it never stopped adapting and reforming. What further reforms would you suggest?

 

[mack341]

They did not declare it invalid, no matter how happy that would make you, mack.

They declared it non-binding should the ECB not provide sufficient justification for the PSPP program for which they were given 3 months to do. They came to the conclusion that there wasn't sufficient justification shown in 2014 and the ECJ judgement sided differently. The German court judged according to German Constitutional Law.

Let it be the first case, which it is not, see e.g. Poland. It will set then maybe a precedent on how these things will be settled in the future. That is what you do in a democracy mack.

They weren't my words but the financial times, I'd be surprised given their status and also paywall they'd get basic facts wrong.

The ECJ had judged the bond buying scheme was fine but the german court have now disagreed but allowed 3 months for the ECB to provide justification, which they probably will be able to do with all their economists etc..

However it is a challenge of the ECJ's supremacy, for the ECB to be answerable to the german court and need to provide them with further justification otherwise the bundesbank cannot participate in the scheme and has to sell it's bonds.

That's my understanding of what has occurred, I'm in favour of it as it places the judgement from courts of a democratic state over the EU's courts, that can only be a good thing.

 

[Harry_BKK]

They weren't my words but the financial times, I'd be surprised given their status and also paywall they'd get basic facts wrong.

The ECJ had judged the bond buying scheme was fine but the german court have now disagreed but allowed 3 months for the ECB to provide justification, which they probably will be able to do with all their economists etc..

However it is a challenge of the ECJ's supremacy, for the ECB to be answerable to the german court and need to provide them with further justification otherwise the bundesbank cannot participate in the scheme and has to sell it's bonds.

That's my understanding of what has occurred, I'm in favour of it as it places the judgement from courts of a democratic state over the EU's courts, that can only be a good thing.

That describes it fairly accurately. The German Constitution still prevails for the German Constitutional Courts and that says that financial instruments such as the PSPP have to be justified. Since the Bundesbank participates, it is bound by the constitution.

Let the supremacy be challenged, no court is above all no matter what and a proper challenge once in a while can only be good.

 

[mack341]

QE was always controversial, I am not a fan of it either (but then I am only an amateur at these things, and a very insignificant voice). It was pretty clear that someone would not let it go, that it is this time the Germans is good because the country has a lot of weight in the EU.

Personally, I welcome the struggle as well as the judgement from the German court. Let them hammer it out, can only be good.

The ECB has been buying debt in amounts that make no sense anymore. EUR2.1 trillion and that during a non-crisis period because growth and inflation were not high enough. They restarted doing it at the end of 2019, the total stands now at 2.2 trillion. What the hell are countries doing with their finances that they are in such dire need for someone to take their debt of them when the economy is doing fairly well? What would be the maximum mark in a crisis? 10 trillion, indefinite?

Please stop with this "future of the EU" malarkey mack. The EU is here to stay but will never be 100% perfect and there will be always mongerers&supporters. The EU has evolved ever since it was created, it never stopped adapting and reforming. What further reforms would you suggest?

Well the southern members have a currency value that makes their exports uncompetitive, that seems to be the underlying issue that has sat there from day one, but wasn't really noticed as all the economies expanded and borrowing was easy, and then the 2008 crash happened and countries needed bailing out.

I think the euro came in in 1997, maybe the southern countries were better off before then when they could adjust their own interest rates etc... The whole idea of the EU, how it was sold, was it would protect the smaller economies in a global world, the standard of living, stronger together etc.. but this seems to be under threat.