Britain tells the EU: we shall not sell out our fishermen

[vinny41]

27 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Either you don't get it or you wilfully want to ignore the facts. Statistics only look at what is easily collected as data. So the statistica site takes money paid out by the EU yes.

 

However, it does not record the fact that the City of London grew exponenttially during the UK's membership of the EU on the back of EU passporting rights for any service providers domiciled in the UK. 

 

If the UK had not been a member of the EU all those international services providers, banks, insurance companies, brokers, law firms, etc would not have set up shop in the City the way they did.

 

There would not have been same tourism to the UK without EU law allowing free travel.

 

There would not have been the same influx of EU workers, paying tax in the UK, without freedom of movement.

 

There would not have been the tax revenue on products the UK was able to sell in the EU thanks to freedom of goods. Fish being a superb example since out of every 3 fish caught by British fishermen, two are sold in the EU

 

Of course you can't quantify exactly those kinds of benefits, but we KNOW they happened. If anyone ever bothered to seriously calculate those benefits, then it is very obvious that the UK was not a net contributor but a net beneficiary of the EU.

 

As for child benefit for kids abroad, I'm afraid this is very much a deficiency of the UK system. It exists because the UK wants to allow British nationals who are abroad to make child benefit claims. That Romanians abuse this is to be expected and could be easily stopped, but as usual your UK government does nothing..

 

In any event, if you're so worried about child benefits, you may want to consider that UK families cost the Exchequer 11.3 billion pounds in child benefits alone. So that puts your 15 milillon for foreigners into context.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40061921

 

As for EU workers not paying National Insurance, that's the biggest nonsense I ever read, I have personally paid National Insurance and have the card to prove it. So I know that's just nonsense. Quite the opposite, actually, I paid in tens of thousands of pounds in National Insurance and WAS NEVER able to claim this money back from the UK.

 

Why would you want the UK to leave the common market? Because of your concern about child benefits? Or because you're concerned EU nationals don't pay National Insurance? Both would be nonsense reasons.

 

It does appear you are the one ignoring the facts

Every Goverment in Europe uses the same criteria for defining which member states are Net Contributors and which member states are net Beneficiaries, you want to create your own definition because the defacto definition does suit you, Sorry it doesn't work that way The UK has been a  Net Contributors to the EU budget since day 1 and that wouldn't change until 2021.

As far as Tourism to the UK that a wild guess on your part without any substance

 

Regarding the child benefit the ECJ was agasint Germany in relation to a Polish worker working in Germany and his children were living in Poland

so nothing to to with a deficiency in the UK benefits system.

And from the BBC that you provided

"One final point - it's not just the British who want to see these bills reduced.

The German government, for instance - which pays far more in child support than the UK does, even to foreign nationals - is also pushing for reductions in the payments, again to better reflect the cost of living in the country in which the child lives."

As to European workers not paying tax and national insurance in the UK that is correct and as far as I know it applies to Posted European workers which i clearly stated in my original post Because it didn't apply in your case doesn't mean it doesn't exist and there even an European website that does provide information if you are a Posted worker

 

I am more than happy that the UK is leaving the European Union and as far as I am concerned it would have been better if the UK had left 20 years ago

 

[vinny41]

17 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Obviously your lack of personal experience forces you to rely on some article.

Glad you appreciated the article

[sandyf]

21 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

The price of Danish Blue was 258Baht for 820 grams.
Incredibly cheap. Have never seen an import cheese here so cheap for years.
31 Baht for 100 grams.
The cheapest cheese in macro, and you have to buy at least a Kilo or more, is 50-60 baht per 100 grams.
 

The poster must have been to a different Siamburi to me. The price you mention is nearer the ballpark for the cheaper cheeses. The problem is that they are cutting it and packing it themselves so each piece is priced on weight and on some cheese the price goes down the larger the piece. There is quite a wide selection so not easy to be specific. Most comes from Australia and with some, like Edam, they have both Australian and Dutch, with the Australian being a good bit cheaper.

Danish Blue and Gouda are not ones I would have looked at.

[vogie]

1 hour ago, luckyluke said:

Except here, and in a specific context, I never mention my pension.

 

And this is not to show off, as my pension is not spectacular at all in Belgium.

 

It may be considered as such for the British,  as they have a really small pension.

 

But that's up to their government.

 

Each country has his own priorities,

it seems the well - fare of the pensioners in the U.K. is not a top priority for the British government.

Priceless,

"I never mention my pension" then you go on to say:

 

And this is not to show off, as my pension is not spectacular at all in Belgium.

 

It may be considered as such for the British,  as they have a really small pension.

 

But that's up to their government.

 

Each country has his own priorities,

it seems the well - fare of the pensioners in the U.K. is not a top priority for the British government.

????????????

 

[transam]

15 hours ago, Logosone said:

The British are not a methodical, organised or intellectual people. They have a constitution, it is written in disparate acts of parliament, court cases and documented conventions. But they never could be bothered to codify it properly like the magnificent French constitution.

 

Just like they don't bother to codify or plan their production in factories properly, hence much lower productivity of the British worker. Not to mention the NHS which is a total chaos.

 

It's a Schande.

 

Then again this has forced them to develop a considerable common sense, which admittedly, we in Europe sometimes miss when we construct our amazing intellectual edifices. The British have their strengths as well, they're excellent mechanics.

Your first sentence just shows where you are coming from, in near every post it is much the same, not sure if you are a baiting or just a wind up merchant, but most definitely a Grouse... .

I must point out that if you are correct, then you are 100% British, stands out a mile..

[luckyluke]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Priceless,

 

Shows how things can be interpreted differently.

And especially how different we are on "The Continent" and in the U.K..

"Different" doesn't mean, in my optic, that one part is better or worse.

We have all our own identity, concepts,

even humor.

 

[sandyf]

17 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Glad you appreciated the article

Jumping to conclusions appears to be a strong point.

[vinny41]

5 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Jumping to conclusions appears to be a strong point.

Not really you failed to criticize the article you instead decided to make a comment against the poster says it all

[transam]

3 hours ago, luckyluke said:

It seems that British like to live on their own, being apart;

certainly one of the reasons why they left the E.U..

 

In Pattaya they speak a language, claiming to be English, but that no other one can understand, except for the words "f..k" and "f...... g", they use at profusion, and strangely  in an understandably way for everyone. 

 

That is only retired SAS blokes....

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Here you go:

 

Eve Geddie, director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions, said: “The reckless measures being taken by the Greek authorities are a blatant breach of EU and international law and will put lives at risk. People seeking asylum are once again being used as bargaining chips in a callous political game.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/greece-violating-eu-international-law-amnesty/1753460

 

I will say the same again, it would only take 1 Turk out of the millions of refugees for Amnesty International to start shouting the odds.

The issue surrounds the 3.6 million Syrian refugees that are in Turkey and refugees must seek asylum in the first border they cross, they cannot transit to a country of their choosing.

Closing the Greek border to Syrian refugees is not a breach of International law as is being claimed.

There is no dispute that a humanitarian crisis exists and it is up to the International community to resolve it, not the Greeks or the EU.

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

It does appear you are the one ignoring the facts

Every Goverment in Europe uses the same criteria for defining which member states are Net Contributors and which member states are net Beneficiaries, you want to create your own definition because the defacto definition does suit you, Sorry it doesn't work that way The UK has been a  Net Contributors to the EU budget since day 1 and that wouldn't change until 2021.

As far as Tourism to the UK that a wild guess on your part without any substance

 

Regarding the child benefit the ECJ was agasint Germany in relation to a Polish worker working in Germany and his children were living in Poland

so nothing to to with a deficiency in the UK benefits system.

And from the BBC that you provided

"One final point - it's not just the British who want to see these bills reduced.

The German government, for instance - which pays far more in child support than the UK does, even to foreign nationals - is also pushing for reductions in the payments, again to better reflect the cost of living in the country in which the child lives."

As to European workers not paying tax and national insurance in the UK that is correct and as far as I know it applies to Posted European workers which i clearly stated in my original post Because it didn't apply in your case doesn't mean it doesn't exist and there even an European website that does provide information if you are a Posted worker

 

I am more than happy that the UK is leaving the European Union and as far as I am concerned it would have been better if the UK had left 20 years ago

 

No, I am looking at the full, true, picture, you are not. The typical net contributor figures are based on simplistic 'what did the EU pay us, what did we pay to the EU'. However, that's not the full reality.

 

The full reality is that the City of London thrived during the days of membership in the EU, substantially because of the very fact that UK domiciled companies could get passporting for their products and services in the EU.

 

Without the EU passporting rights many international banks, brokers, fund managers and the like would never have set up shop in the City. Of course it is not easy to quantify the exact figure, because some would have anyway, but many would not.

 

The same with tourism. Some people would have come anyway, others came because the Eu legalframework made travel very easy and cheaper.

 

Same with workers, some came to the UK because the EU made movement of people easy, others would have come anyway.

 

Whilst we can not quantify exactly these financial advantages the UK gained from EU membership, we certainly know they existed and would have pushed the UK easily into a net benefactor category.

 

As far as Tourism, this is not a wild guess without substance, it is an informed insight with considerable substance. London has seen record number of visitors while in the EU.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2016/may/20/london-record-visitor-numbers-2015-31-5-million

 

Now where did these tourists come from? By far, indeed a VERY VERY VAST MAJORITY, of those visitors come from EU countries, as you can see here (table on the right):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

Tourists from France and Germany alone are DOUBLE the number of US visitors. Of the top ten tourist countries, EIGHT are from the EU. Add the figures up.

 

Now, to argue that the cheaper and document free travel which the EU has promoted played no part in this is simply false.

 

On child benefit, I agree with you, Romanians should not be able to claim child benefit for children in Romania on the UK tax payer. It's perverse. However, it is the UK government paying this, allowing this and doing it. Take it up with the UK government. 

 

Regarding National Insurance, all I know is that I paid National Insurance, I have the card to prove it. What's more, I was NEVER repaid the NI contributions I paid in the UK, even though, thankfully, I don't live in that country anymore. So feel free to apply that sum to make good the money lost on payments for child benefits. 

 

Of course the VAST majority of workers in the UK from the EU are not 'posted' workers, but are people who go there on their own initiative.

 

Again, I fail to see any reason why you could be happy the UK has left the EU. EU membership was an overwhelming benefit to the UK.

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2020 by Logosone

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

The poster must have been to a different Siamburi to me. The price you mention is nearer the ballpark for the cheaper cheeses. The problem is that they are cutting it and packing it themselves so each piece is priced on weight and on some cheese the price goes down the larger the piece. There is quite a wide selection so not easy to be specific. Most comes from Australia and with some, like Edam, they have both Australian and Dutch, with the Australian being a good bit cheaper.

Danish Blue and Gouda are not ones I would have looked at.

Let's not kid ourselves, good cheese is horrendously expensive in Thailand. And that will be the situation in the UK very soon.

 

Yes, you can get cheaper Gouda made in Germany from Tops or Australian Edam. Who in their right mind buys Australian cheese? Or for that matter Danish cheese? I certainly would never look at Danish or Australian cheese, except with a look of pity to express my vast disdain for such mediocre attempts at cheese.

 

But even these imitations of true European cheese are still more expensive in Thailand, than they are in Europe, and will be so in the UK. Not to mention the quality is considerably inferior.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2020 by Logosone

[billd766]

15 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Why does the UK have this trade deficit?

 

Could it be that the UK not producing so much competitive products, although the UK has had barrier-free access to the world's largest single market for over 40 years?

 

Could it be that the UK prefer to let others do the work? So far it has worked well.

So far, that was paid for with the sale of table silver. Who owns the car factories, mass transit systems, energy systems, airports, food production factories, fishing rights, the best places to live in London, hotel chains?

Not too long ago, the UK also sold all tons of its gold holdings.

 

And the Uk clearly lives above its means.

The UK has accumulated a mountain of debt of over 2 trillion. 

There has never been an serious

attempt to achieve a balanced state budget.

 

But there are also very few super rich people in the UK. After Brexit, they can hide their money even better from the tax authorities, for whom the EU measures to dry out tax havens are a thorn in the side. And there is not much left for the mass of the UK population (Gini coefficient).

 

The UK then buys (import) cheaply wherever it can. Mainly consumer products: food, clothing, cars, furniture, electronics. Because the UK cannot manufacture these products itself cheaper.

 

And there we are again with that "negative 100B balance".

 

But the UK is still lucky because it can print its own money. 

But not unlimited either.

The exchange rate hinge reflects this. And how the British pound is evolving in the course of currency parities is obvious, namely downward. Money is nothing more than a securitized claim on the gross national product.

 

It's hard for me to even name a product that says Made in the UK.

 

But the UK lives 80% from its financial services. All over Europe a lot of pensions, insurance and life insurance savings plans are managed, covered and reinsured

by UK companies. 

 

And many of the UK wealth fund managers are quite good, when you look at the savings books in the zero interest phase, their returns.

 

But whoever believes that the EU will allow a third country to control and manage its EU citizens' old-age pensions, unchecked and wirhout EU legal security, is a dreamer. Then all EU citizens could transfer their pension funds to Turkey right away.

 

That is the current UK negotiating situation. 

So where is the UK lever now for better welfare for all of its population?

And please save on stupid one-liners.

 

 

 

 

 

It's hard for me to even name a product that says Made in the UK.

 

Well the first name that came to mind was Morgan cars, the the 2nd was Rolls Royce aero engines The 3rd was British Aerospace.

 

Then I did a Google search and found a couple of links, unfortunately undated but referring to 2017 so I guess that they were written up in 2018.

 

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports-by-country

 

https://oec.world/en/profile/country/gbr/

 

http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-import-partners/

 

And there are quite a few more as well.

 

This isn't a 1 line reply by the way.

 

[Logosone]

Yes, because we all know Morgan cars are everywhere. You can't walk the streets in Bangkok, Morgans everywhere.

 

To be honest, I can't remember EVER seeing a Morgan car outside the UK.

 

As for Rolls Royce aero engines, they have long been a problem for Airbus due to faulty manufacturing and a number of other issues. So much so that Airbus is now about to switch to GE engines. Whether Rolls Royce aero engines can survive is doubted by many:

 

https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/opinion-can-rolls-royce-survive-its-own

 

But it's a fair point, even if UK manufacturing has declined and now only represents 20% of the UK economy, the other being services, there are still a few things that are made in the UK.

 

Pharmaceuticals would be an example.

 

But one has to take the figures with a pinch of salt. BMWs and Toyotas exported from Britain are counted as British exports. Even if profits go to BMW and Toyota.

 

http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-exports/

 

[talahtnut]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

No, I am looking at the full, true, picture, you are not. The typical net contributor figures are based on simplistic 'what did the EU pay us, what did we pay to the EU'. However, that's not the full reality.

 

The full reality is that the City of London thrived during the days of membership in the EU, substantially because of the very fact that UK domiciled companies could get passporting for their products and services in the EU.

 

Without the EU passporting rights many international banks, brokers, fund managers and the like would never have set up shop in the City. Of course it is not easy to quantify the exact figure, because some would have anyway, but many would not.

 

The same with tourism. Some people would have come anyway, others came because the Eu legalframework made travel very easy and cheaper.

 

Same with workers, some came to the UK because the EU made movement of people easy, others would have come anyway.

 

Whilst we can not quantify exactly these financial advantages the UK gained from EU membership, we certainly know they existed and would have pushed the UK easily into a net benefactor category.

 

As far as Tourism, this is not a wild guess without substance, it is an informed insight with considerable substance. London has seen record number of visitors while in the EU.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2016/may/20/london-record-visitor-numbers-2015-31-5-million

 

Now where did these tourists come from? By far, indeed a VERY VERY VAST MAJORITY, of those visitors come from EU countries, as you can see here (table on the right):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

Tourists from France and Germany alone are DOUBLE the number of US visitors. Of the top ten tourist countries, EIGHT are from the EU. Add the figures up.

 

Now, to argue that the cheaper and document free travel which the EU has promoted played no part in this is simply false.

 

On child benefit, I agree with you, Romanians should not be able to claim child benefit for children in Romania on the UK tax payer. It's perverse. However, it is the UK government paying this, allowing this and doing it. Take it up with the UK government. 

 

Regarding National Insurance, all I know is that I paid National Insurance, I have the card to prove it. What's more, I was NEVER repaid the NI contributions I paid in the UK, even though, thankfully, I don't live in that country anymore. So feel free to apply that sum to make good the money lost on payments for child benefits. 

 

Of course the VAST majority of workers in the UK from the EU are not 'posted' workers, but are people who go there on their own initiative.

 

Again, I fail to see any reason why you could be happy the UK has left the EU. EU membership was an overwhelming benefit to the UK.

 

 

 

  There are two ways of looking at the EU membership.

One view is from the wealthy, which I suspect is your situation.

You've done well, and I respect your views.

  The second view is from the poor and working class, which is my

viewpoint, where, since 1973 food banks have increased from a

handful to over 600, child poverty is now in the millions,

homelessness is rife, job opportunities poorly paid, and zero hours

contracts for the desperate. personal and family debt at record

levels. It is for the less fortunate majority, the EU has been a disaster.

That is why they won the Brexit referendum.

[transam]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Yes, because we all know Morgan cars are everywhere. You can't walk the streets in Bangkok, Morgans everywhere.

 

To be honest, I can't remember EVER seeing a Morgan car outside the UK.

 

As for Rolls Royce aero engines, they have long been a problem for Airbus due to faulty manufacturing and a number of other issues. So much so that Airbus is now about to switch to GE engines. Whether Rolls Royce aero engines can survive is doubted by many:

 

https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/opinion-can-rolls-royce-survive-its-own

 

But it's a fair point, even if UK manufacturing has declined and now only represents 20% of the UK economy, the other being services, there are still a few things that are made in the UK.

 

Pharmaceuticals would be an example.

 

But one has to take the figures with a pinch of salt. BMWs and Toyotas exported from Britain are counted as British exports. Even if profits go to BMW and Toyota.

 

http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-exports/

 

Morgan Cars are Italian owned. Morgan cars are known and owned worldwide..

 

https://www.morgancars-usa.com/

 

[jonwilly]

Like to think that Boris will not sell out the British Fishermen.

However they are doing an international trade deal and deals are give and take.

The waters around Britain must remain under UK control.

If it becomes necessary then Britain may lease out permission for some foreign boats to operate in UK water on Paying for the Pleasure.

And I would like to say UK is negotiating with the EU not individual states who are trying to promote their own selfish interests.

 

john

 

[Logosone]

33 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

  There are two ways of looking at the EU membership.

One view is from the wealthy, which I suspect is your situation.

You've done well, and I respect your views.

  The second view is from the poor and working class, which is my

viewpoint, where, since 1973 food banks have increased from a

handful to over 600, child poverty is now in the millions,

homelessness is rife, job opportunities poorly paid, and zero hours

contracts for the desperate. personal and family debt at record

levels. It is for the less fortunate majority, the EU has been a disaster.

That is why they won the Brexit referendum.

 

You probably have a point that perspective colours judgement.

 

I also accept that homelessness, poorly paid jobs and debt are a problem for many households in the UK.

 

Why would you think the EU caused this though? Is it because of the large number of arrivals from the EU that took jobs from the English?

 

I think you'll find that the UK economy was in serious decline in the 1970s before they joined the common market. Let us look at the full picture of poverty.

 

By the end of the 19th century more than 25% of the population was living at or below the subsistence level due to low wages. Only 75 per cent of population had enough money to access food, clothes, rent and fuel. In 1900, millions of population lived in terrible conditions such as damp and badly built houses.  At the same time, overcrowding led to the spread of disease. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

So at the height of Empire was the time when poverty was really bad, much worse than it is today. After WW1 and the advent of German socialism things improved.

 

Looking more recently  "from 1975 to 1985 the number of people living in poverty had doubled in Britain, from just over 3 million to 6.5 million. In 1975, the United Kingdom had fewer people living in poverty than Germany, Italy, Belgium, and Luxembourg. By 1989, Britain had a higher poverty than each of these four countries. In 1989, 12% of the UK population was estimated to be living in poverty, compared with 11.7% in Italy, 8.5% in Germany, 7.9% in Luxembourg, 7.4% in the Netherlands, and 7.2% in Belgium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

So in recent memory you can trace the rise of poverty in the UK, which is a fact and not just a subjective experience, to the industrial decline of the UK. The UK, out if itself got rid of industrial producers and therefore the secure jobs of old disappeared. The richest companies in the UK now use contract workers, which they do not have to pay the same social benefits as actual employees. Ironically I worked for the largest pension fund in the UK and they do this most of all, so pensioners in the UK really benefit from this practice.

 

But we digress, what I'm trying to underline is that it was the decline of UK manufacturing which led to the rise in poverty. The poor performance of the UK economy. However that poor performance was cushioned, not exacerbated by the EU. Because the EU supported the UK economy more than it was a drain.

 

I would be interested to know why you think it was the EU that caused this poverty?

Edited March 8, 2020 by Logosone

[billd766]

6 hours ago, luckyluke said:

It seems that British like to live on their own, being apart;

certainly one of the reasons why they left the E.U..

 

In Pattaya they speak a language, claiming to be English, but that no other one can understand, except for the words "f..k" and "f...... g", they use at profusion, and strangely  in an understandably way for everyone. 

 

Fortunately we are not all like that. I live well away from Pattaya and all the other cities, and whilst I am married to a Thai with a dual nationality Thai/British son, my nearest farang full time neighbour lives 5km away, is Belgian and speaks very little English. My next nearest farang neighbour are a Brit on one side of the highway and 2 Aussies on the other side about 27km away.

 

I meet up with a few farangs about once a month for lunch, beer and a chat. I am comfortable like this.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, transam said:

That is only retired SAS blokes....

The very few that I have met don't live in Thailand at all and are normally very quiet and peaceable. If somebody starts a loud discussion leading to arguments and violence, just look around and the real ex SAS have quietly gone elsewhere. The ones who are left etc are what are known as keyboard or bar stool SAS.

 

To check if they were ever military just ask them what their service number is. If they can rattle it off instantly then they are ex military. If not or hesitate they are fakes. I still remember mine from the 1960s to 1984.

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, talahtnut said:

  There are two ways of looking at the EU membership.

One view is from the wealthy, which I suspect is your situation.

You've done well, and I respect your views.

  The second view is from the poor and working class, which is my

viewpoint, where, since 1973 food banks have increased from a

handful to over 600, child poverty is now in the millions,

homelessness is rife, job opportunities poorly paid, and zero hours

contracts for the desperate. personal and family debt at record

levels. It is for the less fortunate majority, the EU has been a disaster.

That is why they won the Brexit referendum.

That's right - leave the EU and give the nasty party a thumping majority, because tackling inequality and striving for social justice have always been at the core of all nasty party policies. 

[evadgib]

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

That's right - leave the EU and give the nasty party a thumping majority, because tackling inequality and striving for social justice have always been at the core of all nasty party policies. 

The nastiest party wears Yellow, but lets not head in that direction again eh? 

Edited March 8, 2020 by evadgib

[transam]

7 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

That's right - leave the EU and give the nasty party a thumping majority, because tackling inequality and striving for social justice have always been at the core of all nasty party policies. 

Well sort the SNP out then...Gawd....????

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The nastiest party wears Yellow ????

Debatable but off topic 

[evadgib]

Just now, transam said:

Well sort the SNP out then...Gawd....????

Quote

(????????????????????????????, ⛔ )

HTH ????

[RuamRudy]

Just now, transam said:

Well sort the SNP out then...Gawd....????

You are making light of it but my one sentence is totally correct. It is not the EU that is responsible for the rampant inequality in the UK. How long is it since the report linking Tory austerity measures to 120,000 early deaths was published, and how many more have died since, because the Tories remain in power? Yet the post above claims that our poor are struggling because we were in the EU? You couldn't make it up!

[melvinmelvin]

2 hours ago, Logosone said:

Yes, because we all know Morgan cars are everywhere. You can't walk the streets in Bangkok, Morgans everywhere.

 

To be honest, I can't remember EVER seeing a Morgan car outside the UK.

 

As for Rolls Royce aero engines, they have long been a problem for Airbus due to faulty manufacturing and a number of other issues. So much so that Airbus is now about to switch to GE engines. Whether Rolls Royce aero engines can survive is doubted by many:

 

https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/opinion-can-rolls-royce-survive-its-own

 

But it's a fair point, even if UK manufacturing has declined and now only represents 20% of the UK economy, the other being services, there are still a few things that are made in the UK.

 

Pharmaceuticals would be an example.

 

But one has to take the figures with a pinch of salt. BMWs and Toyotas exported from Britain are counted as British exports. Even if profits go to BMW and Toyota.

 

http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-exports/

 

If you wanna see a bunch of Morgans rather than the odd one, go to the US.

 

Guess that will decline now that Morgn last year discontinued building cars with V8s.

Unwise not to offer V8s if you want market expansion for such cars in the US.

 

Rolls R also produce marine engines

and marine dynamic pos. equipment

(both pretty good stuff - but sizeable in terms of "heipennies" I don't know)

 

 

[talahtnut]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

You are making light of it but my one sentence is totally correct. It is not the EU that is responsible for the rampant inequality in the UK. How long is it since the report linking Tory austerity measures to 120,000 early deaths was published, and how many more have died since, because the Tories remain in power? Yet the post above claims that our poor are struggling because we were in the EU? You couldn't make it up!

You have indeed made it up, you have misread me.

I never said 'because of the EU'. I said 'since 1973'. However

you must be aware of a strong undercurrent of resentment

in some EU member states, against bureaucratic policies dictated

by corporate interests.

[melvinmelvin]

3 hours ago, talahtnut said:

  There are two ways of looking at the EU membership.

One view is from the wealthy, which I suspect is your situation.

You've done well, and I respect your views.

  The second view is from the poor and working class, which is my

viewpoint, where, since 1973 food banks have increased from a

handful to over 600, child poverty is now in the millions,

homelessness is rife, job opportunities poorly paid, and zero hours

contracts for the desperate. personal and family debt at record

levels.

 

 

It is for the less fortunate majority, the EU has been a disaster.

That is why they won the Brexit referendum.

 

no problem with your lead in,

but how you manage to conclude the way you do

 

what did EEC do to prevent UK from prospering?

(and without the help of UK cabinet and HoC)

 

[transam]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

You are making light of it but my one sentence is totally correct. It is not the EU that is responsible for the rampant inequality in the UK. How long is it since the report linking Tory austerity measures to 120,000 early deaths was published, and how many more have died since, because the Tories remain in power? Yet the post above claims that our poor are struggling because we were in the EU? You couldn't make it up!

Total tosh....