Another project fear story bites the dust...
 
Unilever scraps Dutch relocation plan
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45756738

Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit. This is actually mentioned in the link. But yeah, brexiteers and facts.....


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

10 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit. This is actually mentioned in the link. But yeah, brexiteers and facts.....


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

'But significant shareholder resistance highlights the power of London's capital markets and the cachet of its leading index. Global shareholders like global companies listed on a global index.

A significant number of Unilever shareholders are saying that means staying in London - that does have post-Brexit significance'.

 

Cherry picking and avoiding evidence has always been a specialty of Remoaners. ????

 

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit. This is actually mentioned in the link. But yeah, brexiteers and facts.....


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

59 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit. This is actually mentioned in the link. But yeah, brexiteers and facts.....


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

"Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit."

 

That didn't stop all the Remainers using the original relocation story as ammunition.

#doublestandards

 

 

2 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

"Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit."

 

That didn't stop all the Remainers using the original relocation story as ammunition.

#doublestandards

 

 

 

They are at least consistent....... perhaps you should include the following hashtag...

 

#ProjectFear

5 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

If my comments have appeared condescending it wasn't my intention. I'm simply replying to spiteful, vitriolic and overtly condescending remarks made about the UK by people who see Brexit as some kind of betrayal, even at a personal level, which I find hilarious. I won't lower myself to becoming equally vitriolic in my replies, as it is totally unnecessary, even if I am offended by the lack of respect for the British people shown by certain uninformed people on TVF, this is at the end of the day just a debate, it should remain as friendly as possible, even when it becomes infected with cynicism and idiocy.

That's some comedy gold there, my friend.

 

5 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

If you inferred 'British exceptionalism' from my comments, well, that's your inference. I don't believe that Brits are superior to anyone else, that would be nationalist, and though I am a patriot and strongly believe in patriotism and civic pride, there is a very significant difference between these concepts and nationalism. I think what you're doing here, like so many tend to, is projecting your own emotional hang ups and prejudices on to me, someone you've never met or know anything about. 

I reject your faux psycho babble and refer to my previous justification, which I believe is clear and the inference reasonable.

 

5 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

That I don't have a bulldog tattooed on my arm or a misty eyed, undeserved sense of Britain being superior is not a dismissal of what our forefathers accomplished'

 

As if to prove my previous point - this is all hyperbole of your own fashioning, haha! I don't have any tattoos and never have, I don't feel an undeserved sense of Britain being superior and last time I checked my eyes weren't misty. Why you feel the need to compare me to a caricature based on your own dislikes and prejudices for simply giving a factual appraisal of the modern world says more about you than it does me. I brought up WWII because it made indelible impressions on the world, particularly Europe, you could say it was the driving force behind the creation of the EU in the first place. Britain's role in both wars was vital, for Europe particularly. Something that seems to be too often forgotten or derided. That doesn't sit well with me.

I never inferred that you, personally, had  a tattoo (although you have made repeated statements about our forefathers accomplishing more than those from other nations) - I was merely playing along with a stereotype of a modern day John Bull. As for my dislikes and prejudices, someone recently wrote on these boards "I think what you're doing here, like so many tend to, is projecting your own emotional hang ups and prejudices on to me, someone you've never met or know anything about. " 

Oh yeah - it was you.

 

As for Britain's role in WW2, that has never been denied on these threads to the best of my knowledge, and certainly not by me. 

6 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

What I said was you disregarded England's, Scotland's, Wales's and Ireland's separate and combined histories, saying that the actions of the past millennium had 'nothing to do with Britishness' aka our culture - as quoted above... I can't recall a more fatuous comment being made on here, and that's saying something! The constituent country's histories are, for one thing, inexorably linked and overlapped for well over a millennium in fact, so however you care to define our rich culture(s), what other context you can frame it/them in besides our combined and unilateral histories? Utterly ridiculous to try to argue otherwise.

A little touch of revisionism creeping in here - let me remind you of what you wrote: "Pursuing our own destiny is something we've done more successfully than most for over a millennium". 

But that aside, in no way have I disregarded our past history, but merely suggested that many more great accomplishments occurred outside the British isles than within. Rich and fascinating cultures evolved, rose and fell in every corner of the globe. 

 

6 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

So are you really saying that the history of the UK vis-a-vis liberty, law, innovation and the pioneering of constitutional/personal freedoms was identical to other nations in the previous few centuries? If you are, then you are in dire need of a history lesson. Maybe that's something you should devote some time to?

I guess you might infer such a ridiculous notion if your ability for critical analysis was compromised; otherwise I would suggest that you are merely struggling (and failing) to find an angle to attack me on. But let me make it simple for you - the world is dynamic, and revolutions have been occurring in every part of it since man was able to collectively organise himself.  Maybe it is you who needs the history lesson?

 

7 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

gain, I never once said it was. Nationality is an accident of birth, of course.

All I was doing was merely celebrating and drawing attention to the deeds of our ancestors and their crucial, emancipating effect on our European neighbours. This silly comment is once again just a projection of your own misgivings, as you're assigning sentiments to me that I haven't vocalised once. This is becoming a nasty habit.

At no point have I ascribed characteristics to you - as you point out, I don't know anything at all about you, however you seem comfortable explaining my motivations with confidence. Again, however, you are falling wide of the mark with your pop psychology.

 

7 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

All 100% conjecture, solely your opinion, no fact or reality in any of it. Firstly it's waaaaaay too early to make any judgement about the UK being driven anywhere, let alone of a cliff. We haven't even Brexited yet for christ's sake! And secondly, the 'Bull Dog spirit' may be a myth to you, but it doesn't mean that the heroic deeds of braver men and women should be denigrated by someone such as yourself, or me or anyone else for that matter.

NOt quite correct - possibly you may not have picked up on it, but there are more than me (and lots of people much smarter than me) who are suggesting that your optimism is misplaced; even the Vote Leave's promise of £250 million a week for the NHS has been replaced with assurance that there will be enough to eat, although contingency plans are being drawn up to cope with possible civil unrest in the event of a meltdown of our existing way of life. So, it is not solely my opinion that I am positing from. 

 

But you are 100% correct when you state that "the heroic deeds of braver men and women should be denigrated by someone such as yourself, or me or anyone else for that matter", but then again, I, in no way, did so - just your desperate attempt to smear me. 

 

7 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

It was coined for good reason. Reasons you know nothing about and probably never will. Both you and I should count ourselves lucky that we haven't had to.

I would not be so arrogant, rash or bellicose as to suggest what you do or do not know so I think our interaction is done now. Have a good brexit.  

 

'But significant shareholder resistance highlights the power of London's capital markets and the cachet of its leading index. Global shareholders like global companies listed on a global index.

A significant number of Unilever shareholders are saying that means staying in London - that does have post-Brexit significance'.

 

Cherry picking and avoiding evidence has always been a specialty of Remoaners. [emoji6]

 

 

 

 

I am neither cherry picking nor avoiding evidence just stating that the Unilever relocation plan was not because of Brexit. Fact.
And I am not a ‘remoaner’, not even a remainer. If the UK wants to leave the EU, fine. Interesting economic experiment, but wise?, Nah....


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

11 hours ago, tebee said:

Yes - Spain could block it if we don't make concessions on Gibraltar for instance.  

Once the UK leaves the EU the restraints I.e. that members must respect each others borders will no longer apply,they will just close the border whenever they want, I suppose the UK could send their new aircraft carrier in and then the EU would have to retaliate by closing their borders to the UK a  brexiteers wet dream.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-03/japan-waves-goodbye-to-u-k-as-gateway-to-europe-post-brexit

We're getting there...

 

A Brexit deal can be done in two weeks, Leo Varadkar says, as crunch talks on the Irish backstop intensify

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/10/05/brexit-deal-can-done-two-weeks-leo-varadkar-says-crunch-talks/

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

"Unilever always denied that the relocation plan had anything to do with Brexit."

 

That didn't stop all the Remainers using the original relocation story as ammunition.

#doublestandards

 

 

 

All the Remainers minus one. I didn't.

2 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

 

'But significant shareholder resistance highlights the power of London's capital markets and the cachet of its leading index. Global shareholders like global companies listed on a global index.

A significant number of Unilever shareholders are saying that means staying in London - that does have post-Brexit significance'.

 

Cherry picking and avoiding evidence has always been a specialty of Remoaners. ????

 

 

 

 

Agreed. Up to now share holders in the UK have been supine but they weren't prepared to see Unilever move out of the UK and out of the FTSE100. This is a real bloody nose day for Unilever and a victory for shareholder democracy. Sorry, didn't mean to offend any Remainers by mentioning the word "democracy"

8 minutes ago, aright said:

Agreed. Up to now share holders in the UK have been supine but they weren't prepared to see Unilever move out of the UK and out of the FTSE100. This is a real bloody nose day for Unilever and a victory for shareholder democracy. Sorry, didn't mean to offend any Remainers by mentioning the word "democracy"

I heard the Remainer shareholders are demanding another EGM so they can re-run the vote

Agreed. Up to now share holders in the UK have been supine but they weren't prepared to see Unilever move out of the UK and out of the FTSE100. This is a real bloody nose day for Unilever and a victory for shareholder democracy. Sorry, didn't mean to offend any Remainers by mentioning the word "democracy"

Guess we can now wait for the next hostile takeover bid. Relocation to the Netherlands would have given better protection.
Pyrrhic victory?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

3 hours ago, adammike said:

Once the UK leaves the EU the restraints I.e. that members must respect each others borders will no longer apply,they will just close the border whenever they want, I suppose the UK could send their new aircraft carrier in and then the EU would have to retaliate by closing their borders to the UK a  brexiteers wet dream.

The apes will hurl rocks down on the Dons and beat them back!

30 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

OMG, with Brexit the UK not only lost their good deal within the EU but they lost their good sense of humor as well......
 

Well, not really. The Brits have not lost their humour. 

Post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed along with reply.

 

Advised before not a single positive reason to quit...but.....

 

 

22 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Advised before not a single positive reason to quit...but.....

 

 

 

No, no; I think you should.

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Advised before not a single positive reason to quit...but.....

 

 

 

Yes, this guy says a lot of weird stuff. I don't think his critical thinking is up to scratch.

 

http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2009/01/when-david-lammy-should-have-known.html

Brexiteers continually harp on about the EU being undemocratic yet a region in Belgium brought CETA to a halt.

Will Scotland or Wales have the same say in the UK deal?

 

And without the agreement of all regional parliaments, Belgium’s national government cannot give its consent to CETA at the EU level.

https://theconversation.com/who-are-the-walloons-and-why-are-they-blocking-europes-free-trade-deal-with-canada-67718

For those that think a Canada deal would be straightforward, even the EU have not got it sorted yet.

 

When Wallonia finally agreed to CETA, the Belgian national government announced it would ask the EU Court of Justice for an opinion on whether the ICS respects the EU Treaties before Belgium would finally validate CETA.

The case is currently pending and will be decided in the next few months.

http://theconversation.com/the-uncertain-future-of-the-canadian-european-trade-deal-100228

 

Question submitted to the Court

Is Chapter Eight (‘Investments’), Section F (‘Resolution of investment disputes between investors and states’) of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Brussels on 30 October 2016, compatible with the Treaties, including with fundamental rights?

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=196185&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=909639

13 hours ago, aright said:

Agreed. Up to now share holders in the UK have been supine but they weren't prepared to see Unilever move out of the UK and out of the FTSE100. This is a real bloody nose day for Unilever and a victory for shareholder democracy. Sorry, didn't mean to offend any Remainers by mentioning the word "democracy"

That is absolute garbage, It was nothing to do with the shareholders per se.

Some of the UK pension providers are required under their regulations to invest a certain amount of their fund in the FTSE 100 which in many cases would have included Unilever. 

If Unilever had move their London HQ then they would have lost their FTSE 100 listing and the pension providers would have had to sell their holdings. Large blocks being sold at the same time invariably brings the share price down, something Unilever decided to avoid.

Something else to chew on.

 

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) will next month consider whether Brexit can be halted if MPs want it to be.

On Friday the ECJ confirmed the case, brought by a group of Remain-supporting campaigners had, had been “granted the fast-track procedure” after a Scottish court said the issue was “urgent”.

It comes after the Court of Session in Edinburgh said it was referring the question of whether the UK is able to unilaterally withdraw its Article 50 letter – sent in March 2017 – to Luxembourg.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-european-court-justice-article-50-backtrack-jolyon-maugham-a8571206.html

16 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

That's some comedy gold there, my friend.

 

I reject your faux psycho babble and refer to my previous justification, which I believe is clear and the inference reasonable.

 

I never inferred that you, personally, had  a tattoo (although you have made repeated statements about our forefathers accomplishing more than those from other nations) - I was merely playing along with a stereotype of a modern day John Bull. As for my dislikes and prejudices, someone recently wrote on these boards "I think what you're doing here, like so many tend to, is projecting your own emotional hang ups and prejudices on to me, someone you've never met or know anything about. " 

Oh yeah - it was you.

 

As for Britain's role in WW2, that has never been denied on these threads to the best of my knowledge, and certainly not by me. 

A little touch of revisionism creeping in here - let me remind you of what you wrote: "Pursuing our own destiny is something we've done more successfully than most for over a millennium". 

But that aside, in no way have I disregarded our past history, but merely suggested that many more great accomplishments occurred outside the British isles than within. Rich and fascinating cultures evolved, rose and fell in every corner of the globe. 

 

I guess you might infer such a ridiculous notion if your ability for critical analysis was compromised; otherwise I would suggest that you are merely struggling (and failing) to find an angle to attack me on. But let me make it simple for you - the world is dynamic, and revolutions have been occurring in every part of it since man was able to collectively organise himself.  Maybe it is you who needs the history lesson?

 

At no point have I ascribed characteristics to you - as you point out, I don't know anything at all about you, however you seem comfortable explaining my motivations with confidence. Again, however, you are falling wide of the mark with your pop psychology.

 

NOt quite correct - possibly you may not have picked up on it, but there are more than me (and lots of people much smarter than me) who are suggesting that your optimism is misplaced; even the Vote Leave's promise of £250 million a week for the NHS has been replaced with assurance that there will be enough to eat, although contingency plans are being drawn up to cope with possible civil unrest in the event of a meltdown of our existing way of life. So, it is not solely my opinion that I am positing from. 

 

But you are 100% correct when you state that "the heroic deeds of braver men and women should be denigrated by someone such as yourself, or me or anyone else for that matter", but then again, I, in no way, did so - just your desperate attempt to smear me. 

 

I would not be so arrogant, rash or bellicose as to suggest what you do or do not know so I think our interaction is done now. Have a good brexit.  

 

Well, this rebuttal was quite the read Mr.RuamRudy, had me chuckling into my morning coffee. Ta very much.

 

'I reject your faux psycho babble and refer to my previous justification, which I believe is clear and the inference reasonable.'

 

Feel free to, I'm not charging you by the hour after all. This is simply what I 'infer' from your rabbiting on a previous page, I believe it to be totally reasonable and rather obvious. ????

 

'you are 100% correct when you state that "the heroic deeds of braver men and women should be denigrated by someone such as yourself, or me or anyone else for that matter but then again, I, in no way, did so' 

 

Yes, thanks for that admission, but I'm afraid you did indeed when you stated that 'the only sop to be handed out was the myth of the indomitable Bull Dog spirit'. Quite the denigration there, much as you'd like to deny it. Pangs of guilt?

 

As for the other points you've laboured over, I don't feel I'll even bother touching on them at the moment. 

 

Maybe its best to leave it at - 'we'll agree to disagree' and have a good Brexit as you cordially suggested.

 

Repeatedly arguing these points is becoming a little time consuming, as engaging as it can be. As I've stated previously, I vehemently disagree with you and I feel my points are totally valid. But then you probably feel the same way, naturally enough.

 

I don't think either of us need to descend into properly slandering someone we don't know nor have ever met. All I will say is that I totally disagree with you and think you're utterly misinformed and mistaken in your outlook, idea of history and grasp of the present situation. You're one of many, IMO. But that is just my opinion.

 

End of the day, those of us who wanted Brexit, look as though (these words are used tentatively) we shall get our wish.

 

The rest of the debate is technically moot, other than discussion around planning for the nation's future and discussing how best the British people can move forward and shape our own destiny. Discussing it with some optimism and self belief would be a start. The cynicism and seemingly overwhelming desire from certain people to see the UK fail and be punished for leaving the EUSSR is what baffles and offends me most on this TVF thread.

 

Sore losers I guess?

 

 

 

 

On 9/30/2018 at 5:54 PM, tebee said:

 

Yes but you are still missing my point - all remainers voted to stay in the SM as did a number of leavers - otherwise there would never have been any talk of a soft brexit.

 

Therefore there may have been a majority vote to leave the EU , but there was almost certainly NOT a majority vote to Leave the SM - that was this government's choice post-referendum. 

 

So if you say the majority vote to leave the EU must be honoured why can I not say that the majority vote to stay in the SM should be also honoured.

 

Taking the majority of a majority option is not democracy which should respect all viewpoints - that way lies years or turmoil and dissent. 

 

Only compromise will heal the country in the long term.

Tebee, I was not missing your point, I was not even thinking of your point, but making my own point!!!

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

That is absolute garbage, It was nothing to do with the shareholders per se.

Some of the UK pension providers are required under their regulations to invest a certain amount of their fund in the FTSE 100 which in many cases would have included Unilever. 

If Unilever had move their London HQ then they would have lost their FTSE 100 listing and the pension providers would have had to sell their holdings. Large blocks being sold at the same time invariably brings the share price down, something Unilever decided to avoid.

UK pension providers should change their rules to allow Unilever move it's London HQ to mainland Europe. - I'm just thinking like a real Brexiteer. 

20 minutes ago, oilinki said:

UK pension providers should change their rules to allow Unilever move it's London HQ to mainland Europe. - I'm just thinking like a real Brexiteer. 

 

Why should they change the rules just for the EU when the EU won't change its rules for Brexit?

 

Actually you are thinking like a Remainer which is what you are, or would be if you were British.

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Why should they change the rules just for the EU when the EU won't change its rules for Brexit?

 

Actually you are thinking like a Remainer which is what you are, or would be if you were British.

I was just pointing out how silly the demands for EU to change its rules, because one exiting member, really are. 

14 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I was just pointing out how silly the demands for EU to change its rules, because one exiting member, really are. 

I wouldn't mind betting that you would be very upset if the UK got a good deal from the EU.

I am just wondering why you seem to be the most vocal poster on this brexit discussion, we have had it for 2 years now and with every post your bitterness seems to increase. Is it because you fear what might happen to the EU with the departure of the UK.