May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

What about a financial one. 

 

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Notice that since rehabilitation and European nations' voluntary membership into a common agenda for economic prosperity and military defense, neither you nor your family have fought and suffered in an European war.

 

Perhaps NATO also had a lot to with that, and NATO was in place long before the EEC and the EU.

 

Perhaps I should not mention the former Yugoslavia and its minor breakup that required NATO to help stop it.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, pitrevie said:

I know the feeling, best 3 years of my life living in Germany.

 

I liked Germany a lot when I was there with the RAF.

 

A few years later I worked in Portugal which I really enjoyed for 6 months, Holland was OK for work and food, France was not a place I liked working and living for 6 months but 15 months back in Germany again was great.

 

The best years of my working life were the ones I spent in Thailand and I still think they are. That bit is off topic.

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Self-inflicted.

Surely not for ordinary working people.

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Still not very explicit for a conversation. So I'll expand my consternation.

 

How does Nazi Germany that subjugated European nations through the force of war compare to today's democratic Germany that relies on a peaceful political representation process through a multi-nation voluntary democratic institution to advance its national agenda? No comparison to Hitler's Germany.

 

Notice that since rehabilitation and European nations' voluntary membership into a common agenda for economic prosperity and military defense, neither you nor your family have fought and suffered in an European war.

You seem to forget that West Germany was heavily policed and monitored by WW2 allied forces for many years. And East Germany was a Soviet satellite.

 

After, reunification and new economic power, Germany is pushing to dominate Europe via virtual control of the EU. This will backfire  eventually. 

[Flustered]

7 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Economy of Scale.

It's more efficient to have one large, consolidated customer that operates on a centralist philosophy than a smattering of small customers all operating independently.

That my friend is a total disaster recipe.

 

One large customer is the biggest no no of any business plan.

[Flustered]

4 hours ago, mommysboy said:

There are times when UK Parliament is rather sparse too.

 

As regards the Express story: it is just that.

I do not recall any senior politician or even the Queen as Head of State making such public remarks about Parliament.

 

Considering Junkers is meant to represent the EU, he does not think much of it.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Flustered

[SheungWan]

4 minutes ago, Flustered said:

I do not recall any senior politician or even the Queen as Head of State making such public remarks about Parliament.

 

Considering Junkers is meant to represent the EU, he does not think much of it.

Listening to Nigel Farage endlessly droning on in the Euro Parliament in his boorish manner would be enough to turn anybody off.

[SheungWan]

8 minutes ago, Flustered said:

That my friend is a total disaster recipe.

 

One large customer is the biggest no no of any business plan.

I have just forwarded your message to Foxconn so that they can dump Apple immediately.

[Flustered]

2 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

I have just forwarded your message to Foxconn so that they can dump Apple immediately.

And I am sure with your influence and reputation in the financial world, they will listen to you.

[SheungWan]

Jeremy Corbyn is one dodgy geezer as far as Brexit is concerned though a lot of Anti-Brexiteers seem to have a tin ear on the matter. http://tinyurl.com/yd64p9u8

 

[pitrevie]

49 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Listening to Nigel Farage endlessly droning on in the Euro Parliament in his boorish manner would be enough to turn anybody off.

Nobody has to that often he has the 2nd worst attendance record of any MEP. However I see your point, even once is too much. 

[nauseus]

6 hours ago, pitrevie said:

Article 29 of the Irish Constitution.

 

The Senate/Seanad Eireann shall be composed of citizens who have done honour to the Nation by reason of useful public service or who, because of special qualifications or attainments, represent important aspects of the Nation's life.

 

The Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland permitted the state to ratify the Lisbon Treaty of the European Union.

 

The Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution (Treaty of Lisbon) Act 2009, which was approved by referendum on 2 October 2009 (sometimes known as the Lisbon II referendum).

The amendment was approved by the Irish electorate by 67.1% to 32.9%, on a turnout of 59%

 

Perhaps once a country has made up its made they shouldn't be allowed a second referendum on the same subject.

 

As David Davis the Brexit minister stated if a country cannot change its mind then it isn't a democracy.

The Treaty of Nice was ratified by Ireland in 2002 in a second referendum after the first Irish vote rejected it in 2001.

 

The 2005 EU Constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters halted the ratification process so Ireland never got that far!

 

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the EU constitution was convoluted into the The Lisbon Treaty, which was basically the same thing but even harder to read!

 

The first referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon held on 12 June 2008 was rejected by the Irish.

The second referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon held on  2 October 2009 was passed by the Irish.

 

All the above is classic EU democracy in practice. "If at first you don't succeed" .

 

Why did the Irish change their minds again? Well, if Ireland was to reject Lisbon again, then the treaty could not be ratified, so there was considerable "pressure" from the EU itself. Changes regarding tax rates, abortion, neutrality, and workers’ rights were allowed and the Irish Government pushed these. However,  a new the economic fear and uncertainty, due to the happening global financial crisis, was critical and actually fortuitous for the EU!

 

Of course, the UK never had a vote on Lisbon! Brown signed us in. Labour won the 2005 general election having promised a referendum on the European Constitution but then dropped the pledge, arguing that Lisbon was a different document! About as different as a couple of frozen peas. But at the same time we lost 40 vetos! Brilliant.

Edited July 5, 2017 by nauseus

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

There's no free lunches for a smaller economy. If less risk of economic disruption and greater opportunity for economic expansion results from such a relationship, a price is expected to be paid. So long as all the terms and conditions are transparent, one enters such a relationship with "eyes wide open."

 

I'm not sure you're you got the point I was making (maybe I wasn't clear enough). It's the 'eggs in one basket' syndrome. The bigger org keeps giving the smaller one more and more work at great reward. Once there are enough eggs in the basket, the bigger org starts getting later and later with payment. Then it starts cutting the smaller org's prices to the bone, and the smaller org can't walk away because it's in too deep.

 

Whilst the UK EU relationship isn't a private enterprise, we're already in a bit too deep, as shown by the EU's negotiating position.

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

With only 99 MEP's out of 751 MEP's (2014) a German dominance requires a coalition of inter-EU Members to dominate the EU Parliament - sounds like a very democratic institution based on majority representation.

 

That must by why Juncker et al usually report straight to Merkel with important news, instead of their own parliament .

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

You seem to forget that West Germany was heavily policed and monitored by WW2 allied forces for many years. And East Germany was a Soviet satellite.

 

After, reunification and new economic power, Germany is pushing to dominate Europe via virtual control of the EU. This will backfire  eventually. 

Codswallop.

[Khun Han]

29 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Jeremy Corbyn is one dodgy geezer as far as Brexit is concerned though a lot of Anti-Brexiteers seem to have a tin ear on the matter. http://tinyurl.com/yd64p9u8

 

 

It's hardly the biggest secret in politics, and was the cause of a major bust-up in the parliamentary party post-referendum.

[dick dasterdly]

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The Treaty of Nice was ratified by Ireland in 2002 in a second referendum after the first Irish vote rejected it in 2001.

 

The 2005 EU Constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters halted the ratification process so Ireland never got that far!

 

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the EU constitution was convoluted into the The Lisbon Treaty, which was basically the same thing but even harder to read!

 

The first referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon held on 12 June 2008 was rejected by the Irish.

The second referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon held on  2 October 2009 was passed by the Irish.

 

All the above is classic EU democracy in practice. "If at first you don't succeed" .

 

Why did the Irish change their minds again? Well, if Ireland was to reject Lisbon again, then the treaty could not be ratified, so there was considerable "pressure" from the EU itself. Changes regarding tax rates, abortion, neutrality, and workers’ rights were allowed and the Irish Government pushed these. However,  a new the economic fear and uncertainty, due to the happening global financial crisis, was critical and actually fortuitous for the EU!

 

Of course, the UK never had a vote on Lisbon! Brown signed us in. Labour won the 2005 general election having promised a referendum on the European Constitution but then dropped the pledge, arguing that Lisbon was a different document! About as different as a couple of frozen peas. But at the same time we lost 40 vetos! Brilliant.

I'd often wondered why the population of a couple of countries changed their minds when the original referendum was ignored and the electorate presented with a second referendum - as they'd voted incorrectly in the first referendum!

 

Your post provides some answers as to how this happened.

[pitrevie]

4 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'd often wondered why the population of a couple of countries changed their minds when the original referendum was ignored and the electorate presented with a second referendum - as they'd voted incorrectly in the first referendum!

 

Your post provides some answers as to how this happened.

Its a bit like the British we hold a referendum that decides to remain in the EU but an element don't accept it and start the fight for a second referendum until they get the result they want. 

[nauseus]

43 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Codswallop.

IYHO of course! Do you have a reference for that comment? 

 

And do you mean the domination bit or the backfire bit? 

Edited July 5, 2017 by nauseus

[nauseus]

21 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

It's hardly the biggest secret in politics, and was the cause of a major bust-up in the parliamentary party post-referendum.

Jeremy Corbyn is one dodgy geezer as far as most fings is concerned, innit?

 

So dodgy if he had the power, this geezer would be for turnin' on the single market and so effectively Brexit. 

[nauseus]

28 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'd often wondered why the population of a couple of countries changed their minds when the original referendum was ignored and the electorate presented with a second referendum - as they'd voted incorrectly in the first referendum!

 

Your post provides some answers as to how this happened.

Thanks, they were generally different versions of Project Fear. Governments v People.

[sandyf]

On 7/4/2017 at 3:10 PM, Flustered said:

 

 

You made a clear statement that the White House had ruled out any bi lateral talks and failed to show any link to a news or official source of this.

 

You then stated it was a comment.

 

No White House statement, no link to a news report, just a comment without reference.

 

However, he has stated that he prefers bi lateral agreements, a complete contrast to your comment.

 

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314846-ross-prefers-inking-bilateral-trade-agreements

 

As I said, Fake News from you.

Defamation is a criminal offence. The inability to read and understand is no excuse.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

we're already in a bit too deep, as shown by the EU's negotiating position.

As I said, "one enters such a relationship with "eyes wide open."

If not, there certainly will be pain. But there is also the Law of Diminishing Returns. There's only so many eggs that can be cracked before all you have left is one omelet.

[SheungWan]

29 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Jeremy Corbyn is one dodgy geezer as far as most fings is concerned, innit?

 

So dodgy if he had the power, this geezer would be for turnin' on the single market and so effectively Brexit. 

Innit? Oh Gawd. Just turned on his own shadow cabinet members holding out for pro-Single Market. Doesn't fit in with the Hard Brexiteers storyline, but never mind, just ignore it. Please continue.

[SheungWan]

6 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

As I said, "one enters such a relationship with "eyes wide open."

If not, there certainly will be pain. But there is also the Law of Diminishing Returns. There's only so many eggs that can be cracked before all you have left is one omelet.

Its always one omelette however many eggs you crack open. Try again.

[nauseus]

19 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Innit? Oh Gawd. Just turned on his own shadow cabinet members holding out for pro-Single Market. Doesn't fit in with the Hard Brexiteers storyline, but never mind, just ignore it. Please continue.

He's changed his mind twice already. Why not again?

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, pitrevie said:

Nobody has to that often he has the 2nd worst attendance record of any MEP. However I see your point, even once is too much. 

Not at all surprising, as he saw the EU for what it is. Yet he kept being elected by the electorate, the same British electorate that returned more MEP, from UKIP than from any other political party.

It's also worth pointing out, that throughout his term in Brussels, and of course Strasbourg, he continually promoted his own redundancy, along with all the other British MEP's finally being successful just over one yr ago.

[pitrevie]

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Not at all surprising, as he saw the EU for what it is. Yet he kept being elected by the electorate, the same British electorate that returned more MEP, from UKIP than from any other political party.

It's also worth pointing out, that throughout his term in Brussels, and of course Strasbourg, he continually promoted his own redundancy, along with all the other British MEP's finally being successful just over one yr ago.

Didn't stop him taking the money or getting appointed to the fisheries committee and then turning up once out of a possible 42 times. That is rather a lame excuse for not representing the people who elected you. 

Just to remind you his party was wiped out at the last general election and despite making seven attempts to get into our own UK parliament he has been rejected every time. 

[sandyf]

What's the difference between the so called project fear and reality? - Time.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-service-sector-miss-forecasts-brexit-latest-news-construction-manufacturing-data-a7824216.html

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-uk-manufacturers-tipping-point-unless-government-clarifies-strategy-deal-cut-a7822681.html

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/food-prices-rise-at-fastest-pace-for-more-than-three-years-in-june-as-weak-pound-bites-a7824131.html

 

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

He's changed his mind twice already. Why not again?

The article points out that he was always for Brexit. The Labour Party was against Brexit for both the referendum and the election but the open civil war inside the Labour Party caused by Corbyn's half-hearted efforts to campaign against Brexit. For the general election, Corbyn wanted to win back voters previously lost to UKIP, so he kept quiet on immigration and has blocked opposition to the Single Market which requires open EU labour movement. Corbyn hasn't changed his mind. He is just trying to go with the flow. End result? Still lost the election but kept his position and looks to have a another go next time round. The focus on opposition to austerity puts pressure on May and Brexit which has argued that in the longer term the UK will be better off out of it. However, there are potential short term costs and if they are not being costed then there are problems ahead. Corbyn may be viewed as hard-left, but in reality just another ridiculous play on populism similar to the hard-right hard brexiteers. The threat is from the extremes. Both of them.