All TM's deal has shown is that not one single Brexiteer can agree with another as to what Brexit actually means.

21 hours ago, Brunolem said:

Right!!!

 

The "economies of scale" are made on the back of the workers!

See Apple and its Chinese sweatshop where workers were jumping through the windows until they had to install nets!

And see Amazon where workers pee in bottles because they can't afford a toilet break!

 

And as you rightly say, all the profits are stashed in tax havens, escaping taxation, and benefiting a handful of top executives (the four top executives below Apple's CEO each received a 25 million dollars bonus last year!).

 

 

....and outside the EU, Britain will have no option but to succumb to these tyrannies.

On 11/16/2018 at 8:32 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

would bet my life savings that the UK (sadly) will finish up this process smaller, poorer. less influential and diminished.

 

No need, the Brexiteers have already done that for you.

11 minutes ago, kwilco said:

All TM's deal has shown is that not one single Brexiteer can agree with another as to what Brexit actually means.

I think Teresa May summed it up herself when she said Brexit means Brexit, which is exactly what all the Brexiteers want.  What she is doing is betraying the voters by trying to negotiate a deal with the EU which was no part of the actual vote.

16 minutes ago, gmac said:

I think Teresa May summed it up herself when she said Brexit means Brexit, which is exactly what all the Brexiteers want.  What she is doing is betraying the voters by trying to negotiate a deal with the EU which was no part of the actual vote.

QED

18 minutes ago, gmac said:

I think Teresa May summed it up herself when she said Brexit means Brexit, which is exactly what all the Brexiteers want.  What she is doing is betraying the voters by trying to negotiate a deal with the EU which was no part of the actual vote.

well,

as I understand it, there will be Brexit - eventually - but 2 years delayed

 

I think Teresa May summed it up herself when she said Brexit means Brexit, which is exactly what all the Brexiteers want.  What she is doing is betraying the voters by trying to negotiate a deal with the EU which was no part of the actual vote.

So it's only about what the Brexiteers want? Why not let the people decide now everyone knows what is on offer? Fortunately the likes of Boris, Rees-Mogg and Farage are still very much a minority both on parliament and in the country.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

....and outside the EU, Britain will have no option but to succumb to these tyrannies.

I remember seeing a documentary about small British towns forming communities, and even creating their own currency...and doing quite well...people looked quite happy.

 

I think that, once the globalism fantasy will collapse, either because of people's revolts (populism) or because of financial issues, the future could well look like that, a move from gigantism back to human scale.

 

The UK could use the Brexit opportunity to turn toward the future instead of trying to cling desperately to the doomed globalism project.

 

Of course, exchanges with other countries would still be required, but instead of obsessing on the import-export balance, the UK could focus on being as much autonomous as possible.

 

One example of the madness of globalism, taken from another documentary: in the UK, farmers grow apples which are then sent to...South Africa to be polished (!!!) before being sent back to the UK to be sold in supermarkets!

 

This how our global "civilization" manages to burn 10 calories in order to deliver 1 calorie of food!

 

Talk about economies of scale...

 

4 hours ago, Brunolem said:

I remember seeing a documentary about small British towns forming communities, and even creating their own currency...and doing quite well...people looked quite happy.

 

I think that, once the globalism fantasy will collapse, either because of people's revolts (populism) or because of financial issues, the future could well look like that, a move from gigantism back to human scale.

 

The UK could use the Brexit opportunity to turn toward the future instead of trying to cling desperately to the doomed globalism project.

 

Of course, exchanges with other countries would still be required, but instead of obsessing on the import-export balance, the UK could focus on being as much autonomous as possible.

 

One example of the madness of globalism, taken from another documentary: in the UK, farmers grow apples which are then sent to...South Africa to be polished (!!!) before being sent back to the UK to be sold in supermarkets!

 

This how our global "civilization" manages to burn 10 calories in order to deliver 1 calorie of food!

 

Talk about economies of scale...

 

You've been reading the Hobbit.

Your fantasy is nice, but totally unconnected to reality or Brexit.....

6 hours ago, gmac said:

I think Teresa May summed it up herself when she said Brexit means Brexit, which is exactly what all the Brexiteers want.  What she is doing is betraying the voters by trying to negotiate a deal with the EU which was no part of the actual vote.

I think you'll find her current stance is "My Brexit, or no Brexit at all"

4 hours ago, Brunolem said:

I remember seeing a documentary about small British towns forming communities, and even creating their own currency...and doing quite well...people looked quite happy.

Are these communities fully isolated? Meaning that they don't import modern globalist products like medicines, cars, ways to create electricity etc. etc. ?

 

Back to the 1800's simple life trusting that god will take care of the people without help of the modern day globalist sciences?

4 hours ago, Brunolem said:

I remember seeing a documentary about small British towns forming communities, and even creating their own currency...and doing quite well...people looked quite happy.

 

I think that, once the globalism fantasy will collapse, either because of people's revolts (populism) or because of financial issues, the future could well look like that, a move from gigantism back to human scale.

 

The UK could use the Brexit opportunity to turn toward the future instead of trying to cling desperately to the doomed globalism project.

 

Of course, exchanges with other countries would still be required, but instead of obsessing on the import-export balance, the UK could focus on being as much autonomous as possible.

 

One example of the madness of globalism, taken from another documentary: in the UK, farmers grow apples which are then sent to...South Africa to be polished (!!!) before being sent back to the UK to be sold in supermarkets!

 

This how our global "civilization" manages to burn 10 calories in order to deliver 1 calorie of food!

 

Talk about economies of scale...

 

"Of course, exchanges with other countries would still be required, but instead of obsessing on the import-export balance, the UK could focus on being as much autonomous as possible."

 

Reminds me of the original justification for the CAP policy (IIRC, it was decades ago!) - to ensure that eu countries were never reliant on others for food?

 

And what has happened since then?  Individual countries are still reliant on other eu countries for food - partly as a result of the CAP policy!  Not to mention that food is far more expensive than it should be - again as a result of CAP.....

The Brexit deal.......

 

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

You've been reading the Hobbit.

Your fantasy is nice, but totally unconnected to reality or Brexit.....

Reality is that globalism is dying right in front of your eyes, and that, like it or not, you are going to have to live with something else...as people have done for millenia up until the unfortunate advent of the 1980s...

 

As often, the Brits were precursors with their (poorly managed) Brexit, then came Trump, followed by others in Europe, then in South America...and it will not stop...there is more to come, much more, and hapless dinosaurs like Merkel and Macron are only precipitating the collapse by forcing people to take a medicine they don't want!

2 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Reality is that globalism is dying right in front of your eyes, and that, like it or not, you are going to have to live with something else...as people have done for millenia up until the unfortunate advent of the 1980s...

 

As often, the Brits were precursors with their (poorly managed) Brexit, then came Trump, followed by others in Europe, then in South America...and it will not stop...there is more to come, much more, and hapless dinosaurs like Merkel and Macron are only precipitating the collapse by forcing people to take a medicine they don't want!

Talk about fear mongering.. 

 

No. It's just liberal democracy which takes occasional hits due Russian sponsorship of creating conflict in western societies. Naturally each of our countries have always had people who like to complain about everything and blame their own unhappiness to others. Russian efforts simply magnified these thoughts. 

 

The great majority don't want divided countries and divided Europe. Sensibility will prevail again. This just take a bit of time and how it looks now, people are already going towards sensible co-operation.

 

Brexit was a drunk vote. Now Britain is having the hangover of the lifetime and feeling quite a lot of remorse what happened during that crazy Brexit night. It's ok. We all screw up big time, sometimes. EU will naturally forgive UK the stupid things UK did when being lightheaded. Just don't do it again.

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

Are these communities fully isolated? Meaning that they don't import modern globalist products like medicines, cars, ways to create electricity etc. etc. ?

 

Back to the 1800's simple life trusting that god will take care of the people without help of the modern day globalist sciences?

Believe it or not, international exchanges have existed for centuries, together with communities!

 

While in 1970, for example, the French were not dying for lack of American vaccines, or Australian cherries in December, they were also eating their own locally grown food instead of waiting in line at Mc Donald's!

 

On the leisure side of things, when you traveled abroad in the 60s and 70s, you could really feel the change, and appreciate it.

 

No need to go far, crossing the Channel to visit London was a unique experience, where you came from with your suitcase full of products unavailable on the other side of the Channel...

And don't even mention going all the way to the USA, or to Thailand!

 

Today...the same s..t everywhere...are people better off for that?

The billionaires certainly, the average Western worker whose income has not increased (in constant terms) during the last 40 years, not so much...

Edited November 18, 20187 yr by Brunolem

4 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Talk about fear mongering.. 

 

No. It's just liberal democracy which takes occasional hits due Russian sponsorship of creating conflict in western societies. Naturally each of our countries have always had people who like to complain about everything and blame their own unhappiness to others. Russian efforts simply magnified these thoughts. 

 

The great majority don't want divided countries and divided Europe. Sensibility will prevail again. This just take a bit of time and how it looks now, people are already going towards sensible co-operation.

 

Brexit was a drunk vote. Now Britain is having the hangover of the lifetime and feeling quite a lot of remorse what happened during that crazy Brexit night. It's ok. We all screw up big time, sometimes. EU will naturally forgive UK the stupid things UK did when being lightheaded. Just don't do it again.

What fearmongering?

Why should we be afraid of non-globalization?

If we managed to live for centuries without it, why couldn't we now?

 

It is not only the Brits...what about Austria, Italy, Hungary, Brazil, and the growing advances of populists almost everywhere in the West?

 

Russia? Seriously? Even CNN doesn't go that far!

 

The Brazilians and Philippinos elected populist leaders because they were manipulated by Putin?

 

Instead of looking for a convenient strawman, Western leaders should better do some introspection and show some modesty by admitting their (multiple) errors...

8 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Believe it or not, international exchanges have existed for centuries, together with communities!

 

While in 1970, for example, the French were not dying for lack of American vaccines, or Australian cherries in December, they were also eating their own locally grown food instead of waiting in line at Mc Donald's!

 

On the leisure side of things, when you traveled abroad in the 60s and 70s, you could really feel the change, and appreciate it.

 

No need to go far, crossing the Channel to visit London was a unique experience, where you came from with your suitcase full of products unavailable on the other side of the Channel...

And don't even mention going all the way to the USA, or to Thailand!

 

Today...the same s..t everywhere...are people better off for that?

The billionaires certainly, the average Western worker whose income has not increased (in constant terms) during the last 40 years, not so much...

Life expectancy was quite lower in 60's and 70's. I remember seeing my grandfather's, walking sticks, which he got as his 50th birthday present. He died before I was born.

 

I wasn't even a lust in my parent's eyes in 60's, so I can't really comment how it was to travel at the time. I however have traveled around the globe, the globalist I am, quite a lot during my 20's and 30's. With these travels I have experienced quite a lot of different cultures.

 

What made the travels so easy was this current global co-operation. We can have access to other countries simply by showing our passports. We can travel to different destinations by intercontinental airliners. We can even have the security of health by having a travel insurance which helps us while we explore the world. 

 

That's the globalism I like. Ability to see the world and ability to meet different kind people around the world. Learn from them, teach them. 

 

What comes to McDonalds and Starbucks, I agree totally. I eat hamburgers perhaps couple times a year. I refuse to buy anything from Starbucks on principle and practicality. It's a stupid choice.

 

Globalism for me means that we are no longer have to specially rich or otherwise in a special position that we are able to see other countries and their cultures. I did it when I was rather poor student / occasional worker. 

 

On the other hand globalism is also ability to share resources by all the people in this world. Take International Space Station as an example. Other science projects as well, which helps us all in the long run.

Clarify please,

why is it stupid to purchase and enjoy an expresso from Starbucks?

 

Have I missed something here?

 

 

 

56 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Life expectancy was quite lower in 60's and 70's. I remember seeing my grandfather's, walking sticks, which he got as his 50th birthday present. He died before I was born.

 

I wasn't even a lust in my parent's eyes in 60's, so I can't really comment how it was to travel at the time. I however have traveled around the globe, the globalist I am, quite a lot during my 20's and 30's. With these travels I have experienced quite a lot of different cultures.

 

What made the travels so easy was this current global co-operation. We can have access to other countries simply by showing our passports. We can travel to different destinations by intercontinental airliners. We can even have the security of health by having a travel insurance which helps us while we explore the world. 

 

That's the globalism I like. Ability to see the world and ability to meet different kind people around the world. Learn from them, teach them. 

 

What comes to McDonalds and Starbucks, I agree totally. I eat hamburgers perhaps couple times a year. I refuse to buy anything from Starbucks on principle and practicality. It's a stupid choice.

 

Globalism for me means that we are no longer have to specially rich or otherwise in a special position that we are able to see other countries and their cultures. I did it when I was rather poor student / occasional worker. 

 

On the other hand globalism is also ability to share resources by all the people in this world. Take International Space Station as an example. Other science projects as well, which helps us all in the long run.

Before globalism, it was also possible to travel on the cheap...the Bangladesh Biman old 707 that I flew on to Thailand in 1978 was full of backpackers who, like myself had spent a couple of months working during their summer holidays in order to finance the trip.

 

The difference is that these travellers were motivated by exploring a very different country, not for one minute planning to go join a pack of foreigners in Pattaya or Phuket and look for the closest Swiss or British restaurant or pub...which didn't exist anyway...

 

Another major issue is that before globalism, during what is called "les 30 glorieuses" (the 30 glorious years) going roughly from 1945 to 1975, an average worker could support his family without any problem: buy a house, a car and provide for his wife and 2 or 3 children.

 

Unemployment was unknown...

 

Yet, because of the competition (slave workers) brought by globalization, this has changed dramatically...nowadays the two parents must work, and it's often not enough, and the children are left alone...and since the late 70s the average wages have not increased in real terms, while the prices certainly have (the stats are very telling for those who want to know more).

 

This latest point is the number one reason why Western people are fed up with globalization and turning toward populism...

The ignorance of leading Brexiteers is quite breathtaking...Raab has no idea about how critical Dover is and this Nadine Dorries is complaining we won't have representation in Europe....What planet has she been living on????.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nadie-dorries-slams-brexit-deal-leave-remain-jk-rowling-a8639216.html?fbclid=IwAR1fMnpLVZRnbL5s19QYWqBFOjDel6pP4_m_fORntohVRISiFm23YlZMn-Y

29 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Before globalism, it was also possible to travel on the cheap...the Bangladesh Biman old 707 that I flew on to Thailand in 1978 was full of backpackers who, like myself had spent a couple of months working during their summer holidays in order to finance the trip.

 

The difference is that these travellers were motivated by exploring a very different country, not for one minute planning to go join a pack of foreigners in Pattaya or Phuket and look for the closest Swiss or British restaurant or pub...which didn't exist anyway...

 

Another major issue is that before globalism, during what is called "les 30 glorieuses" (the 30 glorious years) going roughly from 1945 to 1975, an average worker could support his family without any problem: buy a house, a car and provide for his wife and 2 or 3 children.

 

Unemployment was unknown...

 

Yet, because of the competition (slave workers) brought by globalization, this has changed dramatically...nowadays the two parents must work, and it's often not enough, and the children are left alone...and since the late 70s the average wages have not increased in real terms, while the prices certainly have (the stats are very telling for those who want to know more).

 

This latest point is the number one reason why Western people are fed up with globalization and turning toward populism...

You shoe an almost total lack of understanding of both world economics and British history.

26 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You shoe an almost total lack of understanding of both world economics and British history.

My post (that you quote) has absolutely no connection with British history!

 

As for the people who tell me that I have no understanding of a given subject, yet stop short of coming with contradicting arguments and facts, I tend to ignore them, because bold short statements are not a proof of superior knowledge...

Edited November 18, 20187 yr by Brunolem

17 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

My post (that you quote) has absolutely no connection with British history!

 

As for the people who tell me that I have no understanding of a given subject, yet stop short of coming with contradicting arguments and facts, I tend to ignore them, because bold short statements are not a proof of superior knowledge...

QED

2 hours ago, oilinki said:

Life expectancy was quite lower in 60's and 70's. I remember seeing my grandfather's, walking sticks, which he got as his 50th birthday present. He died before I was born.

 

Many people use the life expectancy argument as proof of progress, ignoring that it comes at a (steep) cost.

 

First, generally speaking, I'd rather live 60 years of a very good life than 90 years of a miserable life...and I am not convinced that people have a better quality of life today than some decades ago.

 

Having said that, when the retirement systems were implemented after WWII, the retirement age was generally set at 65, which was also the average life expectancy at that time.

 

That was not random, but calculated to be sustainable.

 

With life expectancy extending to 85 or even further, what happened is that the retirement funds were more and more squeezed, up to the point of being massively underfunded today (see New York, Chicago, Calpers and every pension system in the West).

 

So, while you may rejoice of your potential longevity, you may also wonder who or what will pay for your retirement, because actually nobody cares!

The governments are plugging the holes on a day to day basis, until they will be overwhelmed (and ruined) by the costs...and they don't give a damn about those who are twenty years or more away from retirement!

The HISTORY of housing in UK is directly linked to supply and demand and governments' policies or attempts to meet that demand.

Ownership after the war was about 25% it is now 64% .

The rise has not been smooth, there have been about 3 or 4 bubbles since WW2 in particular in the seventies, which totally contradicts your rise-tinted recollections.

.  The last was this century.

Currently Brexit is causing a slow down in freeze of prices and it is looking like it will put it into negative equity for many owners

Britain has one of the highest house ownership rates in the world.

At present the Tory government has through austerity and Brexit massively increased the rich poor divide.

House ownership in UK has a huge cultural weighting and this often manicure market trends....... none of this however is due to globalism or "slave Labour".

 

If you are going to comment on the history of housing you really need to brush up on your facts figures evidence and trends before spouting comments based on purely blinkered personal perspective.

I have to say however that I agree totally with your summation of your life expectancy

31 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Many people use the life expectancy argument as proof of progress, ignoring that it comes at a (steep) cost.

 

First, generally speaking, I'd rather live 60 years of a very good life than 90 years of a miserable life...and I am not convinced that people have a better quality of life today than some decades ago.

The point is to have a good life untill the end, I agree with that.

 

But when the life expectancy is low, it often means that older age suffering starts earlier. Therefore the past generations 60 years old would be in the same health situation as the 90 years old is now. 

12 minutes ago, kwilco said:

The HISTORY of housing in UK is directly linked to supply and demand and governments' policies or attempts to meet that demand.

Ownership after the war was about 25% it is now 64% .

The rise has not been smooth, there have been about 3 or 4 bubbles since WW2 in particular in the seventies, which totally contradicts your rise-tinted recollections.

.  The last was this century.

Currently Brexit is causing a slow down in freeze of prices and it is looking like it will put it into negative equity for many owners

Britain has one of the highest house ownership rates in the world.

At present the Tory government has through austerity and Brexit massively increased the rich poor divide.

House ownership in UK has a huge cultural weighting and this often manicure market trends....... none of this however is due to globalism or "slave Labour".

 

If you are going to comment on the history of housing you really need to brush up on your facts figures evidence and trends before spouting comments based on purely blinkered personal perspective.

While I suppose that your comments are directed at me, I don't remember ever mentioning UK's housing history in any of my posts???

 

More generally, I don't pretend to have any specific knowledge of UK's history, having more than enough to deal with the one of my own country.

 

Otherwise, I am always interested in learning more, in this case about the direct connection between the increase of British housing ownership and the UK being a member of the EU.

 

Please feel free to elaborate on this specific issue...

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

The HISTORY of housing in UK is directly linked to supply and demand and governments' policies or attempts to meet that demand.

 

Since you insist on bringing History to the table, let's have a look at some facts, not related to the specifics of housing, and without going back to the times of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

 

What is the EU...providing a closer look?

 

The EU is a collection of failed empires, British, French, Austro-Hungarian and so on, desperately clinging together in search of a new grandeur.

 

Like neutrons stars remaining after the explosion of supernovae, they have lost their shine, yet refuse to give up.

 

Whatever benefit the EU may have brought, the fact is that each of these nations is nowhere near where it used to be for centuries.

 

The EU is an association of losers, with a great past and a less than promising future.

 

Its populations are dramatically shrinking, which is a sure sign of malaise and lack of confidence in the future, and many of its members are being slowly swallowed by "imported cultures", which carry much more long term consequences than imported goods.

 

What is precisely weakening the EU is this objective of grandeur craved by aspiring Napoleons such as Macron or Juncker...an objective which cost billions every year for nothing in return (Brussels gigantic bureaucracy, the parliament moving back and forth between two different cities, the translations between a multitude of languages which no member nation want to dispense with, and so on).

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 20187 yr by Brunolem