JonnyF

The other poster referenced the last year, a mature president, and the white house. Sounds like Biden to me. Who did you think he was referring to?

Yes I paraphrased his post. He said "I think the international events of the past year have demonstrated precisely why it’s important to have an experienced President in the WH." I paraphrased that his position was "the last year had shown how we needed a mature President". It was an accurate summary of what he said. I referenced Biden to contradict his position. Remind me, how is that not truthful?

Actually another poster stated how the last year had shown how we needed a mature President. Biden was the President this last year and at 79 you could be kind and call him "mature". So I refuted his assertion. Hope that's OK boss...

I was responding to Ozimoron's assertion that he wasn't at all concerned with Biden's mental capacity because he has advisors "advising" him. Maybe you should check with him.

The conversation had evolved beyond the OP. Do try to keep up. Of course, when people don't like the direction of travel and start losing the argument, they scream "off topic". It's all they've got. edit for typo.

Why would he not be concerned with his mental capacity if he thought he would consider the advice given to him carefully? That process of careful consideration requires mental capacity. Think about it for a while before replying, I prefer not to explain it a third time.

Au contraire. There is also a saying "The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend". If what you were saying were true, Ozimoron would be indeed be concerned with his mental capacity. Because he knows Biden would need the mental capacity to listen to the advice, and then weigh up the options and opinons and reach a sensible conclusion. Only if he were blindly following the advice would his mental capacity be of no concern.

Maybe we should let his advisors make all the decisions? Who voted for them? How Democratic.

It's sad isn't it. Electing someone because he isn't someone else. Hardly a ringing endorsement is it? American politics is in a sad state.

The last election proves beyond any doubt that many Americans felt the same way.

"Hey, look over there!". Trump being bad doesn't make Biden good.

FWIW I wouldn't support Trump either. But claiming Biden has shown how we need experience is a bit of a stretch given all his cringeworthy gaffes more reminiscent of a 97 year old than a 79 year old. The US needs fresh blood, not someone who asks for people who died a month ago (after issuing a statement of condolence following her death), confuses Cambodia with Columbia while opening a summit in Cambodia and tries to shake hands with invisible men. I wouldn't support either man, but for completely different reasons. Trump's time is over, he is divisive and should't run. Biden can barely function, let alone lead a country with the stature of the USA. It's sad, pathetic even, that these two seem to be the best the US has to offer.

One that doesn't know the difference between Cambodia and Columbia?

Why was it necessary to evolve from a trading block into a political, federalist project? I don't see why that was necessary. Unproven. It's pretty much impossible to say where we would have been without Covid and the war in Ukraine. It's possible there was a % or 2 drop in GDP in the first couple of years but it's way too early to say what the long term effects will be over the next decade or two. It has only been 2-3 years since we left and those 2-3 years were absolutely devastated financially by Covid lockdowns and the war. It is quite possible that the EU is heading into a long, steady decline and hindsight will show we get out at just the right time. Sometimes it is prudent to play the long game when you see an undesirable direction of travel. For example, for all the talk of the pound's demise, it's at the same level vs the Euro that is was in 2010.

But the UK is a country. So it is expected that tax is dividing up amongst the areas of that country. The EU is supposed to be a trading bloc. It is not (yet) a United States of Europe, although I am sure that is what many Euro technocrats are working towards, complete with EU Army etc. So why should richer nations within a trading bloc give aid (I actually think it's a good choice of word) to poorer nations? I want my taxes spent on my local area, not some region in Poland or shoring up the Greek economy simply because they are part of the same common trading area as us. The creeping federalism of the EU was unacceptable to many, hence the vote to leave the project.

That's why we rolled over loads of the trade agreements. So for many countries outside the EU, they have the same regulations and tariffs as before. They might prefer it. But that it is up the British people to decide, not European corporations. That's true. And if it had remained a common trading area like it started out (maybe it could have been called something like the common market ????) I am sure we would have stayed. However the power hungry Euro politicians couldn't resist empire building. They over-reached massively with their federalist project, and now we are gone. I'd much rather put up with a few trade quotas than surrender sovereignty to a bunch of European technocrats, but I realize others feel that money is far more important than petty things like having true democracy and agency.

Here are my thoughts. The UK was the second largest net contributor, helping countries like Romania, Greece and Poland get a net benefit. Essentially we put in, they took out. Why should the UK taxpayer bail out other member states failing economies? Answer? We no longer have to. https://www.statista.com/chart/18135/member-state-contributions-to-eu-budget/

Maybe he just signs things without reading them? I mean it's not like he's in a position of responsibility. So that wouldn't be a concern at all. ????

Many countries are also suffering recession and inflation as well. Many unions too. Like, oh I don't know, the European Union? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-11/eu-says-recession-is-now-here-and-inflation-shock-will-linger-on

Try to keep it civil old boy. Bit early for dutch courage, what time did you start? Very easy to throw insults from behind a keyboard, I very much doubt you'd call me a coward if I was stood in front of you so best not to do it from the safety of your grotty Pattaya studio ????. Now, let's be nice and get back on topic. What exactly are the consequences of Brexit (not Covid lockdowns, the war in Ukraine etc.). Apart from record low unemployment, regaining sovereignty, faster vaccine rollout etc.

My source is the office for national statistics. Never heard of Macrotrends... Couldn't be bothered with the other 6 points, since they were flippant comments which basically amounted to "The EU had zero control over you when you were in the EU" which is not really worthy of a reply. The only one you provided any evidence for, I debunked.

Thailand.

That's right, we simply rolled over the trade deals without being in the EU. Countries don't care whether we're in that silly club, they just want to do business with us. Having said that, you can have huge trade relations without trade deals anyway. The EU and the US is a good example.

Here are some facts for you. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate#:~:text=Unemployment Rate in the United,percent in December of 1973.

Not quite true. They do exist, but obviously not many people from around the world want to live in North Korea. Legally or illegally. Britain on the other hand is one of the most welcoming, friendly, diverse countries on earth, despite the rhetoric from people from countries with far harsher immigration policies.