May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Xircal]

17 hours ago, chiang mai said:

 

We complain about xenophobia in Thailand but I do think it's equally if not worse in the UK in many respects, goodness, just look at the North South divide to understand that. And if the impact on regional economy as a result is not obvious here's a prime example: last week I sent a request for quotes for legal work to two firms, one in the Hants. and one in E. Yorks., two pieces of work and identical specifications. The quotes came back, GBP 785 vs 199, and 6,400 vs1980, the first number of the pair being the one from the South - the price of lack of investment spurred by xenophobia perhaps!

 

It's not dissimilar to the NIMBY's who don't want new houses constructed in their villages/towns/near by. There we have a desperate need to build new houses because there's a chronic shortage, yet residents of candidate areas repeatedly and loudly shout no, not in my back yard. Ditto immigrants, the country its businesses and the economy desperately need immigrant labour but can they be housed next door, of course not, all of a sudden protection of "my space" becomes far more important than the common good or even any national imperative. What is to be done? In both cases government must be able to say sorry, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and push ahead with the initiative and even set aside areas specially for immigrants, they could call it, Bradford perhaps!

 

But you see the problem: for example, the use of Indian and Asian labour in the textile industry in the North of England in the post war years was a good idea, sadly though the process was started and then left to run without being managed. The good people of the Shires didn't have to live next door to those workers so it wasn't an issue that they needed to care or even think about and perhaps that's the answer - perhaps the NIMBY's need to be made to live next door to immigrants in order for any immigrant program to work successfully, distribute them (as a requirement if necessary) and make every town and village take an immigrant quota and don't let them cluster - the sad fact is that we probably need more immigrants rather then less, but we need to do a much better job of managing and integrating them.

 

Well to be fair housing in the north of the country is usually considerably cheaper than in the south and that would also be reflected in the cost of business premises. So getting two quotes for the same job probably would result in a cheaper one coming from the north.

 

But xenophobia is usually used to describe the perception that anyone foreign, especially if their skin happens to be a darker colour should be regarded with suspicion. In that respect, migrants from Poland would likely be far more acceptable than someone from say Eritrea or Afghanistan. Eritreans will be black and Afghans are going to be Muslim. But both fit the classic xenophobic perception that because they belong to a different culture that they should be treated with skepticism.

 

It's too late to turn back the clock now but I wonder how the referendum would have turned out if Merkel hadn't declared her open door policy to any Syrians who wished to go to Germany. I think that was the catalyst which turned the tide in the Leave's favour.

 

The tabloid press certainly stoked fears that the country was under siege from the thousands of economic migrants  camped on their doorstep with only the English Channel preventing the hordes from flooding the country. Couple that with images of immigrants arriving by the boatload in Greece and Italy forming long queues at border crossings and forcing their way on to trains splashed all over the front pages was enough to tip the referendum in the Leave camp's favour.

 

That and videos of them threatening truck drivers and forcing their way on to trains bound for the UK was just all too much and ultimately even migrants already in Britain began to be regarded as unwanted guests even though they were contributing to the economy.

 

But like you mentioned already, workers from abroad were welcomed initially to do the jobs that Brits didn't want to do. I can remember my mother who was inherently racist I might add, becoming infuriated when Caribbean immigrants began to arrive in Britain in the 1950's. I was too young to understand it at the time, but I can see now how communities become agitated by the arrival of large numbers of immigrants hanging around while their asylum applications are processed especially when they don't behave like adults and leer at women and girls who walk past.

 

The problem now is that even though the Jungle is being demolished and the 10,000+ migrants who were there are being accommodated throughout France the core of the problem which are the people smugglers hasn't been addressed. Britain may or may not retain access to the single market, but the migrants still believe the streets of Britain are paved with gold and until the gangs are eradicated, the migrants will keep coming.

 

[Grouse]

7 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

I see you know a lot about banking? American banks will go to NY? lol

 

 They came from NY in the first place. Your reply is an attempt at obfuscation. 

 

Apparantly NY already has rights to deal in Euro settlements. I'm no banker but that's what was said on CNN.

[Grouse]

6 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Why on earth would you think that politicians ( who are paid large salaries, have large expense accounts and unbelievable pensions), not to mention know they will receive even better paid consultancies/directorships/EMP positions etc., are more trustworthy than the electorate?

 

MPs were obviously convinced that the electorate would vote against brexit - and they were wrong.  I'd like to think that the brexit voters thought that the waste of EU money on salaries/overpaid admin staff to come up with new ridiculous rules etc.  were a large influencing vote, along with uncontrolled immigration for those with no skills that could only reduce  wages for those at the bottom of the heap.

I think I'm right when it comes to uncontrolled immigration as few care very much about foreigners 'at the top' coming in to replace their equivalents in the UK.

 

Too many of the electorate were badly affected by uncontrolled immigration and their MPs proved themselves 'blind' - and that they had no idea that their constituents had enough personal knowledge to finally ignore their politicians advice/directives.

 

In short, a large percentage of the populace finally decided that the issue was too important to trust their MPs pronouncements = which went against everything they had seen happening in their own lives.

 

The whole point of parliamentary democracy is to elect someone who's judgement you trust. You think the collective wisdom of the masses is going to get a better result? Why would you conclude that?

 

Why do you keep going on and on about other people's salaries? I don't think MPs are paid so very much.

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 Unusual that he didn't provide his own opinion as to the result of a brexit vote -before the referendum. - But if he didn't, then kudos to him for realising that he could only offer opinions - as a brexit vote could only leave uncertainty.

 

As for Britain "providing a bridge between different worlds" - I strongly disagree.

 

Britain hasn't impacted the EU much at all, apart from being a nuisance  having rejecting the Euro/getting concessions on maximum working hours/getting concessions on its contribution to the EU etc. etc.  How has any of this provided a "bridge" between the EU and UK?

 

You don't think the UK offered a bridge between Japan and Europe for example?

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

You don't think the UK offered a bridge between Japan and Europe for example?

The EU seems has offered its own bridge: "Building a Bridge between the Asia Pacific and the EU", The Significance of the EU-Japan FTA/EPA, February 10, 2016.

http://www.eu-japan.eu/events/building-bridge-between-asia-pacific-and-eu

The EU-Japan Bridge, The Essential Guide for EU Business

http://www.eu-japan.eu/publications/eu-japan-bridge-essential-guide-eu-business

 

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

The EU seems has offered its own bridge: "Building a Bridge between the Asia Pacific and the EU", The Significance of the EU-Japan FTA/EPA, February 10, 2016.

http://www.eu-japan.eu/events/building-bridge-between-asia-pacific-and-eu

The EU-Japan Bridge, The Essential Guide for EU Business

http://www.eu-japan.eu/publications/eu-japan-bridge-essential-guide-eu-business

 

 

Thats absolutely correct. However, I point to the huge DFI from Japan into the U.K. Primarily because the U.K. Was looked upon as a " Bridge " introduced the EU. I guess the language was an important part of that, together with strong services.

[Grouse]

On reflection, I'm worried about May. When she was appointed, I was just happy it wasn't that evil Ledsome woman. I also liked her humour in appointing Boris as foreign secretary and putting the other Brexiteers in the front line.

 

However, I'm worried now. I'm not sure she has the intellectual clout to handle such complex and frankly "NP Hard" issues. I hope she has a really good "Sir Humphrey" but it doesn't look that way.

 

Any of us who have been involved with critical negotiations would agree that it is foolish to start by alienating the other camp.

 

She should have come clean and been open about her views. I think she has, or at least had, a great opportunity to get close to Merkel. I'm not the only one on TV who can see that there is a sensible way forward. But getting everyone's backs up just to please a Tory conference was extremely unwise.

 

I also think the way she is handling the other members of the UK is less than stellar. She should at least try and keep them on side.

 

I've looked at her background and whereas she's no slouch, she's no intellectual power house either. 

 

Worried ?

Edited October 25, 2016 by Grouse

[Grouse]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-terrible-mistake-tory-health-minister-david-prior-eu-referendum-a7378106.html%3famp?client=safari

 

Fortunately, I'm not alone.

 

Incidently, did you see Question Time from Hartlepool (20 October, YouTube). What a menagerie. You get to see the lot in one room! Racists, nut cases, wise men, abused foreigners, statesmen and Dimbleby trying vainly to maintain neutrality! Fantastic. Don't forget, many of these folks will be relying upon Nissan!

[Grouse]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/24/to-soothe-brexit-jitters-philip-hammond-must-go-beyond-heathrow/

 

Hague, yet another intellectual giant from Yorkshire is correct! But who's going to pay for it? Would have been better to do these things before now and before the ordinary man had been pushed too far.

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

On reflection, I'm worried about May. When she was appointed, I was just happy it wasn't that evil Ledsome woman. I also liked her humour in appointing Boris as foreign secretary and putting the other Brexiteers in the front line.

 

However, I'm worried now. I'm not sure she has the intellectual clout to handle such complex and frankly "NP Hard" issues. I hope she has a really good "Sir Humphrey" but it doesn't look that way.

 

Any of us who have been involved with critical negotiations would agree that it is foolish to start by alienating the other camp.

 

She should have come clean and been open about her views. I think she has, or at least had, a great opportunity to get close to Merkel. I'm not the only one on TV who can see that there is a sensible way forward. But getting everyone's backs up just to please a Tory conference was extremely unwise.

 

I also think the way she is handling the other members of the UK is less than stellar. She should at least try and keep them on side.

 

I've looked at her background and whereas she's no slouch, she's no intellectual power house either. 

 

Worried ?

 

You should be more worried about the hard brexiteers unable to resist the temptation to turning round and biting her whatever the formal cabinet constraints.

[CharlieK]

18 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

I also think the way she is handling the other members of the UK is less than stellar. She should at least try and keep them on side

 

Sturgeon isn't  interested in being kept on side, She is helping the EU with threats of breaking up the UK. Everyone is trying to force the PM to reveal her tactics. 

 

This is the period before article 50, where the political classes hope to scare the Uk into staying. 

[CharlieK]

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-terrible-mistake-tory-health-minister-david-prior-eu-referendum-a7378106.html%3famp?client=safari

 

Fortunately, I'm not alone.

 

Incidently, did you see Question Time from Hartlepool (20 October, YouTube). What a menagerie. You get to see the lot in one room! Racists, nut cases, wise men, abused foreigners, statesmen and Dimbleby trying vainly to maintain neutrality! Fantastic. Don't forget, many of these folks will be relying upon Nissan!

 

Do you think the EU will solve its problems and not collapse? If you think there is a more than 50% chance the EU could collapse, Which would be worse for the UK, going through Brexit or the collapse of the EU? 

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, CharlieK said:

 

Do you think the EU will solve its problems and not collapse? If you think there is a more than 50% chance the EU could collapse, Which would be worse for the UK, going through Brexit or the collapse of the EU? 

 

The chances of the EU collapsing are very small but there will be significant change specifically to avoid fracture. It is worst case for U.K. To leave single market under any circumstances.

[CharlieK]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

The chances of the EU collapsing are very small but there will be significant change specifically to avoid fracture. It is worst case for U.K. To leave single market under any circumstances.

 

So you see the possibility of a fracture! With Merkel and Hollande out of the picture, losing their elections next year, is someone like Junker capable of the change needed to stop a fracture? The fracture could also be the forcing out of weaker EU members like Greece for example. Who pays for that? Maybe admitting open borders don't work without some form of control. 

 

The UK might be able to force that change with Brexit, but there would have to be a seismic change in how the EU works. Their only answer to date is more federalism. They are not able or willing to admit to the mistakes they have made over decades. Their idea of a trade agreement is protectionism for the EU. They are against open trade, they can't and haven't made any new trade agreements for years. The Canadians aren't paying a fee for trading with the EU! 

 

I think we would end up going through an EU collapse, the pain would be the same, and surely even if we were to stay in the EU the £ isn't going to recover and exports to the EU aren't going to level out with imports. It could actually be better for the UK to be able to making trade deals for itself. 

 

Also it isn't what the UK wants, it is what the EU is willing to give the UK as far as brexit is concerned. Of that I am sure especially if it is left to Junker and co. If Merkel is voted out who is strong enough to control Junker, the french are just followers. So there could be an argument for either delaying article 50 till after the German elections or Just going.   

 

 

[Grouse]

6 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

So you see the possibility of a fracture! With Merkel and Hollande out of the picture, losing their elections next year, is someone like Junker capable of the change needed to stop a fracture? The fracture could also be the forcing out of weaker EU members like Greece for example. Who pays for that? Maybe admitting open borders don't work without some form of control. 

 

The UK might be able to force that change with Brexit, but there would have to be a seismic change in how the EU works. Their only answer to date is more federalism. They are not able or willing to admit to the mistakes they have made over decades. Their idea of a trade agreement is protectionism for the EU. They are against open trade, they can't and haven't made any new trade agreements for years. The Canadians aren't paying a fee for trading with the EU! 

 

I think we would end up going through an EU collapse, the pain would be the same, and surely even if we were to stay in the EU the £ isn't going to recover and exports to the EU aren't going to level out with imports. It could actually be better for the UK to be able to making trade deals for itself. 

 

Also it isn't what the UK wants, it is what the EU is willing to give the UK as far as brexit is concerned. Of that I am sure especially if it is left to Junker and co. If Merkel is voted out who is strong enough to control Junker, the french are just followers. So there could be an argument for either delaying article 50 till after the German elections or Just going.   

 

 

 

Well reasoned arguement!

 

I think Merkel represents typical German thinking except for the refugee fiasco. So IF she doesn't survive, her successor will be much the same.

 

There have been federalist and anti federalists from day one. Clearly the balance has got a little out of kilter!

 

I think Brexit has come as a severe shock to the EU. Their main strategic imperative is to hold the EU together so I think significant change is possible.

 

A strategic imperative for the French is to keep tightly connected to Germany.

 

Junker is just a side effect

 

Anyway, the pub beckons!

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

Sturgeon isn't  interested in being kept on side, She is helping the EU with threats of breaking up the UK. Everyone is trying to force the PM to reveal her tactics. 

 

This is the period before article 50, where the political classes hope to scare the Uk into staying. 

 

That was Grouse's quote you mistakenly attributed to me above

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

Do you think the EU will solve its problems and not collapse? If you think there is a more than 50% chance the EU could collapse, Which would be worse for the UK, going through Brexit or the collapse of the EU? 

 

Anybody even vaguely suggesting  >50% risk of EU collapse is not be taken seriously on anything very much IMHO.

[Khun Han]

20 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

 

Anybody even vaguely suggesting  >50% risk of EU collapse is not be taken seriously on anything very much IMHO.

 

You think other people shouldn't be taken seriously on anything because of one particular opinion? Really? That seems more than a little bit narrow minded to me.

[ilostmypassword]

And the bad news keeps on rolling in:

Australia has just dealt a massive blow to the UK government's Brexit plans

Australia has ruled out negotiating free-trade deals with Theresa May's government until Britain has formally completed its departure from the European Union. Steven Ciobo, Australia's trade minister, said on Tuesday that he had received advice telling him entering formal talks with Britain before Brexit is complete would be illegal, The Times reports. This new development is a major blow to Ciobo's British counterpart, Liam Fox, and the rest of May's government.

http://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-liam-fox-eu-australia-trade-deals-2016-10?r=UK&IR=T

[SheungWan]

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

You think other people shouldn't be taken seriously on anything because of one particular opinion? Really? That seems more than a little bit narrow minded to me.

 

Suggesting something as an outlier is OK, but >50%? No, not to be taken seriously.

[SheungWan]

7 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

And the bad news keeps on rolling in:

Australia has just dealt a massive blow to the UK government's Brexit plans

Australia has ruled out negotiating free-trade deals with Theresa May's government until Britain has formally completed its departure from the European Union. Steven Ciobo, Australia's trade minister, said on Tuesday that he had received advice telling him entering formal talks with Britain before Brexit is complete would be illegal, The Times reports. This new development is a major blow to Ciobo's British counterpart, Liam Fox, and the rest of May's government.

http://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-liam-fox-eu-australia-trade-deals-2016-10?r=UK&IR=T

 

This would not be helpful for sterling which is further sliding today below $1.22. Under 42.5 baht mid-point on xe.com.

[sandyf]

6 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

Sturgeon isn't  interested in being kept on side, She is helping the EU with threats of breaking up the UK. Everyone is trying to force the PM to reveal her tactics. 

 

This is the period before article 50, where the political classes hope to scare the Uk into staying. 

I went to school in the north of Scotland during the 1950's and about a quarter of those in my class were Polish.

One of the the big problems is that the majority of English voters would have absolutely no idea why those children were there.

[vogie]

35 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I went to school in the north of Scotland during the 1950's and about a quarter of those in my class were Polish.

One of the the big problems is that the majority of English voters would have absolutely no idea why those children were there.

 

Why wouldn't the English have any idea about why they are there? We all had Poles and other Eastern Europeans for that matter in our classes.

[Khun Han]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

I went to school in the north of Scotland during the 1950's and about a quarter of those in my class were Polish.

One of the the big problems is that the majority of English voters would have absolutely no idea why those children were there.

 

If you'd used the word 'younger' instead of 'English' your statement would have some merit. There are long-established Polish communities all over the UK, and most of us from the older generations appreciate how and why they were established.

[Scott]

4 hours ago, elliss said:

 

          Wow ,  congrtats  on  your  self appointed  status , as  super moderator .              I was  going to contribute  to this topic ,  but my fear of being chastised  by you ,  etc .

         What a  plonker . 

           

                              

You are free to respond.   People who start badgering other members will receive a suspension.  

[Francesco Aiello]

On 24/10/2016 at 10:11 AM, chiang mai said:

 

That's a very good read, it rather knocks on the head the idea that a devalued Pound is good for exports:

 

"But various studies have shown that the price elasticity of demand for UK exports is low. For example, a recent paper by Francesco Aiello, Graziella Bonanno, and Alessia Via of the European Trade Study Group finds that “the long-run level of exports appears to be unrelated to the real exchange rate for the UK.”

 

 

This is an econometric evidence from export functions: Details are in  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cwe.12136/abstract  Results are theoretically admitted as trade elasticity may be unity (mostly in the long run).  Without surprise.

[Francesco Aiello]

The contribution https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/21/why-pound-sterling-collapse-not-good-uk-economy-robert-skidelsky by Robert Skidelsky refers to one of my paper, which is not an unnamed source as someone wrote. Indeed results (easy to be verified) are in http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cwe.12136/abstract

The story the paper tells is that Trade Elasticity matters when evaluating the effects of devaluations. For the UK and the others. Without puzzling-

Edited October 25, 2016 by Francesco Aiello

[sandyf]

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

If you'd used the word 'younger' instead of 'English' your statement would have some merit. There are long-established Polish communities all over the UK, and most of us from the older generations appreciate how and why they were established.

During the war the UK government did little in the way of military resources to protect Scotland. The Polish armed forces were sent north to defend Scotland and left to there own devices. After the war when Churchill sold out the Poles to the Russians  the UK government introduced the 1947 Polish Resettlement Act, the first mass immigration legislation. This led to resettlement communities being established in other parts of the UK.

There is a big difference in the reasons behind the Scottish and English communities.

 

In the UK's hour of need the Poles came to their assistance and now many just view them as parasites.

 

"A woman asked people to stop booing her when she said she no longer felt welcome in the UK since the EU referendum."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37725786

[Grouse]

On 22/10/2016 at 2:25 PM, kevkev1888 said:

 

We took our opportunity. America should take it's opportunity now also. 

 

Hi Elliss!

 

This is the post that wound me up.

 

I apologise that you found my attitude off putting. Sorry!

 

Please consider the context however. We had just had a long running thread closed because of mindless bickering. This thread had started really well with interesting contributions!

 

I guess I over reacted.

 

You are of course more than welcome. ?

 

Once again, MODS, please consider reinstating conversations. With the limit set to 2, it's easy to lose the gist.... Thanks!

Edited October 26, 2016 by Grouse

[Grouse]

57 minutes ago, sandyf said:

During the war the UK government did little in the way of military resources to protect Scotland. The Polish armed forces were sent north to defend Scotland and left to there own devices. After the war when Churchill sold out the Poles to the Russians  the UK government introduced the 1947 Polish Resettlement Act, the first mass immigration legislation. This led to resettlement communities being established in other parts of the UK.

There is a big difference in the reasons behind the Scottish and English communities.

 

In the UK's hour of need the Poles came to their assistance and now many just view them as parasites.

 

"A woman asked people to stop booing her when she said she no longer felt welcome in the UK since the EU referendum."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37725786

 

This Question Time from Hartlepool is worth watching in its entirety. Quite an eye opener!