May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[pitrevie]

Just now, Flustered said:

Due to the format of the Marshall Plan, you cannot compare apples with apples. The Marshall Plan was not all financial in the way of cash hand outs. Each European country that signed up to the plan was treated in an individual manner whether it be food, machinery, debt restructuring, indirect investment or something else. It was a very complicated plan and has been the subject of many debates and thesis.

 

The story that the UK received more in Marshall aid than Germany is purely a myth or a point of view. The aid cannot be compared as much of Germany's aid was re structuring of prime debt and interest rates.

 

In a nutshell, it is an argument that cannot be resolved except for the fact that Germany was the main beneficiary in the way of financial and industrial reorganisation due to the debts it had incurred before and during the war.

 

Regarding unions...I always ask a simple question that is never answered. If the unions are so great and beneficial, why do they not take over industries companies and run them themselves? Answer, because they would run them into the ground and they know it. Unions in general have no interest where the money comes from to pay wage increases as long as they get them. Also, why are so many Trade Union leaders Marxist activists?

 

I remember the Scargill years very well and his avowed intent to bring down the Government using the miners as a weapon. He had no interest in the miners welfare, only his own agenda. Re the bankers, I agree that many of them and not the banks themselves should have been punished harshly but at least it was not their aim to bring down the government of the day, just line their own pockets.

The fact is that the UK received more Marshal Aid than any other country in Europe by a long way.

 

I will answer the last part of your question first as that is the easiest part. The reason so many Trade Union leaders are Marxist is because the average worker couldn't be bothered to get off his fat ass and attend trade union meeting to ensure they didn't get in. Even the introduction of the postal vote made little difference the effort to put a vote in an SAE was too much for the majority of trade unionists. We see the same today in local and general elections a pathetic turnout.

 

As for trade unionist running companies have you ever seen management removing trade unionists and doing their jobs. Perhaps if doctors went on strike you would be content with some management type carrying out your operation. Perhaps in the mines we could have managers doing the jobs of miners or can you imagine Ian MacGregor doing a steelworkers job. Each is suitable for the job to which they have been trained and it would be ludicrous to have unions taking over management as it would be to have management taking over the jobs performed by trade unionists or any other worker. However it is noticeable that in countries such as Germany they have a more successful  management/labour relationship than we have ever had in UK maybe they are doing something different.

 

I note that when GEC one of the biggest companies in UK went into a dive wiping billions of the value of the company there wasn't a trade unionist in sight it was all caused by incompetent management.

I note that when Ferrannti another UK electronic company went bankrupt there wasn't a trade unionist in sight the credit was all managements.

The British Motorcycle industry disappeared I don't recall that being a hotbed of trade union militancy.

I find it strange that manufacturing capacity is on the increase in Germany but on the decrease in the UK maybe its the militant trade unions, I think that excuse ran out years ago.

As I stated I have no sympathy for Scargill, it might not have been the intention of the banks to bring down the government but that is certainly what they achieved. In fact the affects of that financial crisis are still with us today. Scargill in his wildest dreams could not have achieved such extensive damage to the British economy. Was it trade unionists that brought the banks down? Still that's okay they didn't intend to bring the government down just line their own pockets to the tune of billions.

 

Having nationalized the banks to save them we are now handing them back to the same people to carry on, once again valuable state assets are being returned to the private sector rather than being kept in public ownership. In fact it was noticeable as a result of the banking crisis that the EU wanted to introduce stricter banking controls but again thwarted by the UK government. 

[nauseus]

43 minutes ago, Grouse said:

That's a great quote! Thanks for that!

My pleasure, Grouse.

[Flustered]

23 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Here's the facts

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

That is Wikipedias dumbed down version.

 

For details you need to read the Marshall Plan in full and not an abridged version. Also, it is too easy just to look at the cash injection, you need to look at the terms and conditions, the debt restructuring and other aid given in the way of machinery and infrastructure. Much of Americas help to Germany was never added to the bottom line but America took it's pound of flesh in prime debt while other longer standing debt to other nations was ignored.

 

I grew up in the later years of the Marshall Plan and remember some of it's foibles

 

http://marshallfoundation.org/marshall/the-marshall-plan/history-marshall-plan/

 

[nauseus]

34 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Here's the facts

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

I saw the percentages, Grouse. But with this positive assistance, together with the fact that the country was not completely raped of her remaining assets (as would have been the case historically (except by some fleeing Nazis)), meant that the overall margin of benefit was significant. The work ethic of the Germans, plus the fact that industry was basically restarted from scratch, helped even more.    

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, Flustered said:

That is Wikipedias dumbed down version.

 

For details you need to read the Marshall Plan in full and not an abridged version. Also, it is too easy just to look at the cash injection, you need to look at the terms and conditions, the debt restructuring and other aid given in the way of machinery and infrastructure. Much of Americas help to Germany was never added to the bottom line but America took it's pound of flesh in prime debt while other longer standing debt to other nations was ignored.

 

I grew up in the later years of the Marshall Plan and remember some of it's foibles

 

http://marshallfoundation.org/marshall/the-marshall-plan/history-marshall-plan/

 

Yes, you're correct

 

Why did America punish us?

 

We gave them our Crown Jewels! Radar, Asdic, klystron, computers, code breaking, etc etc

[Flustered]

26 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I did not say that 

 

correct / delete please

Hey, someone stealing my quotes! Put him up against the wall.

[Flustered]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Yes, you're correct

 

Why did America punish us?

 

We gave them our Crown Jewels! Radar, Asdic, klystron, computers, code breaking, etc etc

And during the war, they dumped all of their old ships etc on us at full cost to be paid back after the war, enabling them to build new ones for themselves.

 

And don't forget how they openly stole faster than sound plans from us for aircraft.

 

As it always was.......

[Basil B]

28 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I did not say that 

 

correct / delete please

Sorry the snip was by Flustered that you quoted your posting... 

[Grouse]

5 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Sorry the snip was by Flustered that you quoted your posting... 

OK! 2 beers though ?

[Basil B]

4 minutes ago, Flustered said:

And during the war, they dumped all of their old ships etc on us at full cost to be paid back after the war, enabling them to build new ones for themselves.

 

And don't forget how they openly stole faster than sound plans from us for aircraft.

 

As it always was.......

That's only half 1% of the story...

 

My gripe is they told Churchill to destroy and bury "Colossus", the world's first programmable electronic computer so NCR could claim to have invented the first electronic computer.

 

Colossus designed and built by Tommy Flowers at Bletchley  Park during WW11 played a major part in shortening the war ad saving lives yet Tommy was robbed of fame and glory for developing the first electronic computer.

[mommysboy]

6 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

"A lop sided playing field where wages and production costs in many EU countries are much lower than the UK."

 

I agree, but despite this un-level 'playing field' Germany is still doing well - not only because the Euro works in its favour, but also because it has invested in industry/has a far better educational system and has FAR better worker/company policies and balance between the two 'sides'.

 

In short, I blame UK politicians mostly - whilst also blaming the EU for 'open borders' that only encouraged greedy UK companies to take advantage of cheap labour.

 

 

Not sure Germany's domestic market is doing so well.  A lot of its worthwhile ventures are now abroad, and the profits are out there too.  Very ageing workforce and increasingly poor infrastructure.  The idea of this super efficient economy is a bit of a myth. Public spending squeeze too.

[Flustered]

1 hour ago, Basil B said:

That's only half 1% of the story...

 

My gripe is they told Churchill to destroy and bury "Colossus", the world's first programmable electronic computer so NCR could claim to have invented the first electronic computer.

 

Colossus designed and built by Tommy Flowers at Bletchley  Park during WW11 played a major part in shortening the war ad saving lives yet Tommy was robbed of fame and glory for developing the first electronic computer.

I loved Bletchley Park and had many happy months studying computers there. Great place and very badly represented in the work it carries out.

[sandyf]

18 hours ago, pitrevie said:

 

The curious thing is that despite many requests I have yet to have any TV poster step forward and admit they bought shares in the Great British fire sale or even admit to selling them as quickly as possible so they could make a few extra quid.

 

I will put my hand up, I bought a couple, can't remember which ones, just additions to the portfolio at the time. If I sold them it would have been to buy something else. Unfortunately a change in circumstances forced total liquidation, haven't dabbled since.

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, mommysboy said:

Not sure Germany's domestic market is doing so well.  A lot of its worthwhile ventures are now abroad, and the profits are out there too.  Very ageing workforce and increasingly poor infrastructure.  The idea of this super efficient economy is a bit of a myth. Public spending squeeze too.

That's right, I seen an item on BBC news last night highlighting the effects of lack of spending on essential services, particularly schools. The closing statement said that people were now beginning to ask why in this booming economy is their standard of living not improving.

 

I have been to Germany many times, last time was Cologne about 18 months ago, and their standards, and prices, have always appeared to be much higher than that in the UK, maybe stagnation has set in.

[pitrevie]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

I will put my hand up, I bought a couple, can't remember which ones, just additions to the portfolio at the time. If I sold them it would have been to buy something else. Unfortunately a change in circumstances forced total liquidation, haven't dabbled since.

All we need now is for those who voted Brexit and who come here bemoaning the transfer of assets to foreign hands or wanting their country back to confess. One guy here who is almost tenacious in having the last word in any exchange went strangely silent when I brought that up.

[sandyf]

37 minutes ago, pitrevie said:

All we need now is for those who voted Brexit and who come here bemoaning the transfer of assets to foreign hands or wanting their country back to confess. One guy here who is almost tenacious in having the last word in any exchange went strangely silent when I brought that up.

Its a valid point but at the end of the day it is down to the government, rather than if the service was national or private. The government has a say in ownership if in the national interest and I cannot see how essential services and utilities being in foreign ownership can be in the national interest

[Flustered]

This is where politics is shown to be more than black and white. So many think you are left, central or right, Tory, labour or LibDem. It does not work that way.

 

There is no party that covers my beliefs. The only reason we(wife and I) vote Tory or UKIP is to prevent a Labour or LibDem Party getting into power. They would destroy the UK economy again just as Gordon Brown's policies did. And before anyone starts shouting that it was not his fault, you should study what his policies were and who agreed/followed them. With the Tories, the economy is in safe hands to a point.

 

I would see public ownership of (most) of the utilities but run by independent management. I would severely restrict union power to prevent the Marxist leaders carrying out their attempts at overthrowing the Government of the day. Unions have had their day and now it is time for something else. Unless for health and safety grounds, all strikes should be illegal. if you don't like your job,vote with your feet, no one is entitled to a free lunch.

 

Our armed forces would be for the "Defence of the Realm" and not to act as a companion force for some other countries interests.

 

I would see an elected Monarchy where the 10 most eligible stand for election every ten years or so.

 

My list goes on and I can but dream.

 

Meanwhile my dream of Brexit and TM standing her ground against the EU insults and propaganda have come true.

[onthesoi]

23 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Its a valid point but at the end of the day it is down to the government, rather than if the service was national or private. The government has a say in ownership if in the national interest and I cannot see how essential services and utilities being in foreign ownership can be in the national interest

Look to Germany, they have private companies which are wholly owned by the government....it's all very outside the box and clever.

 

When the financial crisis kicked off, Germany was probably the only goverment in falangland who was buying up large private assets at rock bottom prices....to shore up their country.

[onthesoi]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

That's right, I seen an item on BBC news last night highlighting the effects of lack of spending on essential services, particularly schools. The closing statement said that people were now beginning to ask why in this booming economy is their standard of living not improving.

 

I have been to Germany many times, last time was Cologne about 18 months ago, and their standards, and prices, have always appeared to be much higher than that in the UK, maybe stagnation has set in.

Their public services, particularly education, are still better than anywhere else ...& what seems expensive to you might not to a German who is also willing to pay more for quality.

[Naam]

6 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

Look to Germany, they have private companies which are wholly owned by the government....it's all very outside the box and clever.

 

When the financial crisis kicked off, Germany was probably the only goverment in falangland who was buying up large private assets at rock bottom prices....to shore up their country.

can you give us an example and explain in what way it shored up the country?

[Flustered]

8 minutes ago, Naam said:

can you give us an example and explain in what way it shored up the country?

Not my post but I thought it was pretty self explanatory.

[Naam]

5 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Not my post but I thought it was pretty self explanatory.

then perhaps you can name an explanatory example of a private company which was bought by the German government to "shore up the country"?

[onthesoi]

9 hours ago, Naam said:

can you give us an example and explain in what way it shored up the country?

I typed a long reply this but this shit show forum decided to lose it... the short answer is goverments need revinues beyond the taxpayer so they can maintain good public services and can spend their way out of problems.

 

In the wake of the 2007 financial crisis Germany's stock of gross financial assets increased significantly, turning it into the second largest stock among OECD countries.

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SNA_TABLE710R#

[Naam]

7 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

I typed a long reply this but this shit show forum decided to lose it... the short answer is goverments need revinues beyond the taxpayer so they can maintain good public services and can spend their way out of problems.

 

In the wake of the 2007 financial crisis Germany's stock of gross financial assets increased significantly, turning it into the second largest stock among OECD countries.

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SNA_TABLE710R#

that is all correct but a distorted picture because it does not mention the billions spent by the government in the wake of 2008 to shore up banks in order to avoid a domestic financial collapse. none of these "investments" generated any revenue but caused huge losses for the government, respectively for the taxpayer.

 

i am quoting the case of a single bank (one of more than a dozen interventions) where the "investment" has reached € 150 billion and where the expectation of any "return on investment" is nothing but an illusion.

Quote

Hypo Real Estate

This means that the German government—and more fundamentally, the German taxpayer—has now made a total of €150 billion in the form of capital and guarantees available to the bank.

 

[onthesoi]

2 hours ago, Naam said:

that is all correct but a distorted picture because it does not mention the billions spent by the government in the wake of 2008 to shore up banks in order to avoid a domestic financial collapse. none of these "investments" generated any revenue but caused huge losses for the government, respectively for the taxpayer.

 

i am quoting the case of a single bank (one of more than a dozen interventions) where the "investment" has reached € 150 billion and where the expectation of any "return on investment" is nothing but an illusion.

 

To avoid a distorted picture it would be better to include the full post where the entry for Hyper includes the German government's reasoning, see bold below:

 

Hypo Real Estate Seized by SoFFin in 2003 to restore financial stability to the German housing market.

 

Whatever the Germans spent, it made their country stronger(aka 'shoring up'), both in the long and short term ....unless you're suggesting the strongest economy in Europe made a mistake and it would have been better to let the banks and their housing market go to the wall....then it might be my turn to ask you for examples of the better alternative along with some hard evidence?

 

Also, I'm not sure what kind of bank does not offer a line of credit? ....you say the tax payer is exposed but the tax payer is already exposed via bailouts of private banks in all the big economies, the big difference now is the bank being controlled and owned by an organisation elected by said tax payer.

 

None of the German gov investments between 2007 and today have made or saved any money? ..did you bother to read the list I provided, it even includes a chunk of British Telecom ....can you provide evidence for that unlikley claim? ...I say unlikley because we would be talking about near catastrophic losses for Germany....in the face of the fact they are still the strongest economy in Europe, unless you are disputing that as well?

 

The uk gov on the other hand can only dream about buying back their own steel industry, instead reduced to going cap in hand to china/india, my my, how the mighty have fallen, the best laugh in recent years is a state owned french company building a nuclear power station in the uk cos the uk gov cant afford to build it themselves....it's times like these Im glad of being too cynical to be patriotic....

Edited May 13, 2017 by onthesoi

[SheungWan]

4 hours ago, Flustered said:

This is where politics is shown to be more than black and white. So many think you are left, central or right, Tory, labour or LibDem. It does not work that way.

 

There is no party that covers my beliefs. The only reason we(wife and I) vote Tory or UKIP is to prevent a Labour or LibDem Party getting into power. They would destroy the UK economy again just as Gordon Brown's policies did. And before anyone starts shouting that it was not his fault, you should study what his policies were and who agreed/followed them. With the Tories, the economy is in safe hands to a point.

 

I would see public ownership of (most) of the utilities but run by independent management. I would severely restrict union power to prevent the Marxist leaders carrying out their attempts at overthrowing the Government of the day. Unions have had their day and now it is time for something else. Unless for health and safety grounds, all strikes should be illegal. if you don't like your job,vote with your feet, no one is entitled to a free lunch.

 

Our armed forces would be for the "Defence of the Realm" and not to act as a companion force for some other countries interests.

 

I would see an elected Monarchy where the 10 most eligible stand for election every ten years or so.

 

My list goes on and I can but dream.

 

Meanwhile my dream of Brexit and TM standing her ground against the EU insults and propaganda have come true.

Why on earth would anybody come on a forum like this and speak on behalf of their partner's political opinions or voting? its a bit infra dig.

[jpinx]

33 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

To avoid a distorted picture it would be better to include the full post where the entry for Hyper includes the German government's reasoning, see bold below:

 

Hypo Real Estate Seized by SoFFin in 2003 to restore financial stability to the German housing market.

 

Whatever the Germans spent, it made their country stronger(aka 'shoring up'), both in the long and short term ....unless you're suggesting the strongest economy in Europe made a mistake and it would have been better to let the banks and their housing market go to the wall....then it might be my turn to ask you for examples of the better alternative along with some hard evidence?

 

Also, I'm not sure what kind of bank does not offer a line of credit? ....you say the tax payer is exposed but the tax payer is already exposed via bailouts of private banks in all the big economies, the big difference now is the bank being controlled and owned by an organisation elected by said tax payer.

 

None of the German gov investments between 2007 and today have made or saved any money? ..did you bother to read the list I provided, it even includes a chunk of British Telecom ....can you provide evidence for that unlikley claim? ...I say unlikley because we would be talking about near catastrophic losses for Germany....in the face of the fact they are still the strongest economy in Europe, unless you are disputing that as well?

 

The uk gov on the other hand can only dream about buying back their own steel industry, instead reduced to going cap in hand to china/india, my my, how the mighty have fallen, the best laugh in recent years is a state owned french company building a nuclear power station in the uk cos the uk gov cant afford to build it themselves....it's times like these Im glad of being too cynical to be patriotic....

Good comments and much appreciated in the face of the emotional knee-jerk reactions form many posters here and elsewhere. 

 

UK built an empire and the sold it off for short term, quick fixes brought on partly by the cost of the wars and consequent rebuilding, and the massive aid to the war's losers, who have emerged as the economic winners by a country mile, all orchestrated by some seriously flawed fundamental economics based on lines of credit on "money" which actually does not exist except as a numbers on some unfathomable and ambiguous balance sheets, all rubber-stamped by the same incompetent, elected people who created the problem in the first place.

 

Now that the EU experiment needs "fixing", will there be any creative thought of the future beyond next week?  

Edited May 13, 2017 by jpinx

[mommysboy]

4 hours ago, Flustered said:

This is where politics is shown to be more than black and white. So many think you are left, central or right, Tory, labour or LibDem. It does not work that way.

 

There is no party that covers my beliefs. The only reason we(wife and I) vote Tory or UKIP is to prevent a Labour or LibDem Party getting into power. They would destroy the UK economy again just as Gordon Brown's policies did. And before anyone starts shouting that it was not his fault, you should study what his policies were and who agreed/followed them. With the Tories, the economy is in safe hands to a point.

 

I would see public ownership of (most) of the utilities but run by independent management. I would severely restrict union power to prevent the Marxist leaders carrying out their attempts at overthrowing the Government of the day. Unions have had their day and now it is time for something else. Unless for health and safety grounds, all strikes should be illegal. if you don't like your job,vote with your feet, no one is entitled to a free lunch.

 

Our armed forces would be for the "Defence of the Realm" and not to act as a companion force for some other countries interests.

 

I would see an elected Monarchy where the 10 most eligible stand for election every ten years or so.

 

My list goes on and I can but dream.

 

Meanwhile my dream of Brexit and TM standing her ground against the EU insults and propaganda have come true.

 

One mans dream another's nightmare.  I can't think of much worse than a Tory party under sway of its extreme wing.  Dickensian London here we come.  Unfortunately I see Brexit as a bad error that will cost dear, and it has been made worse by an obnoxious Tory right.  I do not admire the way TM has handled it so far.

 

I too am quite eclectic, but come from a left wing bias.  I place strong emphasis on team success, and defence.  Nationalisation of key organizations is paramount for core identity, and communual values.  It isn't about money or efficiency- they lose money of course, but go on to employ a lot of people.

 

The economy failed because of the credit crunch.  In UK that just happened to be when Labour was in power, whereas in USA it was Republicans.

[Naam]

2 hours ago, onthesoi said:

Whatever the Germans spent, it made their country stronger(aka 'shoring up'), both in the long and short term ....unless you're suggesting the strongest economy in Europe made a mistake and it would have been better to let the banks and their housing market go to the wall....then it might be my turn to ask you for examples of the better alternative along with some hard evidence?

don't put words in my mouth i never said or even thought of and keep up the good job of spreading ridiculous theories of governments investing in private companies to "shore up" their countries  

[Flustered]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Why on earth would anybody come on a forum like this and speak on behalf of their partner's political opinions or voting? its a bit infra dig.

Thus speaketh the Strawman with no contribution to the thread as usual.