Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brexit Referendum Superthread

Options
1…304305307309310…330

Comments

  • Options
    #9182
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Why?

    Because those figures only tell you what they want to.

    55% of Britains imports are from EU countries although 16% of EU exports go to Britain.

    In actual fact the amount of money and jobs at stake is mega.


  • Options
    #9183
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    123shooter wrote: »
    Because those figures only tell you what they want to.

    55% of Britains imports are from EU countries although 16% of EU exports go to Britain.

    In actual fact the amount of money and jobs at stake is mega.

    I'm confused. So if I don't use figures to make an argument, then what should I use instead?


  • Options
    #9184
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,294 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    123shooter wrote: »
    Actually you are missing my points entirely and I would never assume that all Irish people agree with the EU but it seems you do?

    Nope that is not what I said, I said was not support for your assertions on protectionism.
    123shooter wrote: »
    you lot are bleating away at how wrong they are and they shouldn't do it. So basically you want to impose your will and idealism over other people who don't want it.

    Nope did not say that either, but I have on occasion pointed out that there is no legal basis for some of the assertions being made in the BREXIT discussions
    123shooter wrote: »
    Well you bleat away. Apparently because of Gina Miller's own goal it is now enshrined in UK law and cannot be stopped so what happens? Well either the UK is a success in which case others may follow and your beloved little utopia will fall apart around you...........or........the UK fails and then you largest trading partner and purchaser of your goods flounders which will sink your economy.

    I don't recall having commented on this either in my post... and clearly you do not understand the significances of the decision in Miller case either. The UK Supreme Court has now clearly established that the UK has a sovereign parliament and that the PM does not have the right to attempt to subverting the constitution by using the queens prerogative. And that will have far reaching consequences not just in BREXIT related issues.
    123shooter wrote: »
    Your bleating will not make any difference in any way............but I suppose someone like me must be wrong and of course you must be right. We all just have to wait.

    You are entitled to your opinion, just as we are entitled to ignore it, if you choose or are unwilling to defend it with facts rather than putting words into our mouths as you have just done in this case.


  • Options
    #9185
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    The only position not elected are the European Commissioner and seeing as they are chosen by each member state by their own process (which the EU has no control over) again the issue lies on a national level and the very institutions you are holding up.

    Just to clarify.

    The process for Commissioners is as follows:

    1. Each member state has the right to NOMINATE a person as a Commissioner. The person concerned does not have to be a citizen of either the member state concerned or even the EU!
    2. The President of the European Commission, after discussions with the NOMINEES, puts them forward for particular roles (eg the Commissioner for Competition etc).
    3. A Committee of the European Parliament holds a separate hearing for each nominee to ascertain their suitability for the position they have been nominated for. This is a "grilling", not a "shoe-in". At the end of that, they vote to either accept or reject the nominee based on their hearing.
    4. They may invite some back for a second hearing if they so choose. Again they vote at the end of a second hearing. They also put any replacement nominees (for rejected candidates) through the same process.
    5. The European Parliament - in full session - then votes on whether to accept or reject the Commission as a whole (including the President of the EC which means he gets voted on twice).
    6. Then, and only then, after the EP vote, are the nominees put forward to the European Council. There, there is, I believe, a vote and the appointment of the Commission to office.
    7. After that, each individual Commissioner MUST take a formal oath of independence to the effect that they will act independently and that they will NOT act as "national champions" since, after all, members states are already represented in both the Council of Ministers and the European Council.

    The whole process is roughly comparable to that used in Presidential systems to appoint their various Ministers or Secretaries (in the case of the US).


  • Options
    #9186
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    Nope that is not what I said, I said was not support for your assertions on protectionism.



    Nope did not say that either, but I have on occasion pointed out that there is no legal basis for some of the assertions being made in the BREXIT discussions



    I don't recall having commented on this either in my post... and clearly you do not understand the significances of the decision in Miller case either. The UK Supreme Court has now clearly established that the UK has a sovereign parliament and that the PM does not have the right to attempt to subverting the constitution by using the queens prerogative. And that will have far reaching consequences not just in BREXIT related issues.



    You are entitled to your opinion, just as we are entitled to ignore it, if you choose or are unwilling to defend it with facts rather than putting words into our mouths as you have just done in this case.

    Jim I wasn't referring to you regards the bleating that was a general observation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9187
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Professor Moriarty wrote:
    Why?

    36% of Irish exports don't go to the UK.


  • Options
    #9188
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,708 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    123shooter wrote: »
    Hold on if you must know I had just clicked on that newspaper because another one was showing 2 items I didn't care to read about.......dog being dragged behind a car and another being cooked alive.

    So nothing to do with what I believe or how Brexit voters get their news about the EU.

    Your accusation is about as exact as the headline.

    I made no accusation other than the Daily Express is one of the most anti-EU papers. Only the Daily Heil Mail is worse. However, it is how Brexit voters get their news.


  • Options
    #9189
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,294 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    123shooter wrote: »
    55% of Britains imports are from EU countries although 16% of EU exports go to Britain.

    So now to clarify are the 16% of exports from the EU included in the 55% of EU items imported into the UK, or what is the point you are trying to make???


  • Options
    #9190
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    First Up wrote: »
    36% of Irish exports don't go to the UK.

    according to this in 2015 it was only 12%:

    http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/irl/


  • Options
    #9191
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    So now to clarify are the 16% of exports from the EU included in the 55% of EU items imported into the UK, or what is the point you are trying to make???

    I did say Jim the amount of money and jobs is mega.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9192
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,453 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    It's a real Trumpian move, to blame Gina Millar for Parliament passing Article 50.


  • Options
    #9193
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    View wrote: »
    Just to clarify.

    The process for Commissioners is as follows:

    1. Each member state has the right to NOMINATE a person as a Commissioner. The person concerned does not have to be a citizen of either the member state concerned or even the EU!
    2. The President of the European Commission, after discussions with the NOMINEES, puts them forward for particular roles (eg the Commissioner for Competition etc).
    3. A Committee of the European Parliament holds a separate hearing for each nominee to ascertain their suitability for the position they have been nominated for. This is a "grilling", not a "shoe-in". At the end of that, they vote to either accept or reject the nominee based on their hearing.
    4. They may invite some back for a second hearing if they so choose. Again they vote at the end of a second hearing. They also put any replacement nominees (for rejected candidates) through the same process.
    5. The European Parliament - in full session - then votes on whether to accept or reject the Commission as a whole (including the President of the EC which means he gets voted on twice).
    6. Then, and only then, after the EP vote, are the nominees put forward to the European Council. There, there is, I believe, a vote and the appointment of the Commission to office.
    7. After that, each individual Commissioner MUST take a formal oath of independence to the effect that they will act independently and that they will NOT act as "national champions" since, after all, members states are already represented in both the Council of Ministers and the European Council.

    The whole process is roughly comparable to that used in Presidential systems to appoint their various Ministers or Secretaries (in the case of the US).


    One detail to confirm, there is actually no power in the EU to block a nation's nominee. Only the power to reject the commission as a whole.

    It would be a pointless affair and indicate much worse issues but the EU could in theory get trapped in a loop of a country nominating the same Commissioner and the the parliament rejecting the commission as a whole over and over.


  • Options
    #9194
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    First Up wrote: »
    36% of Irish exports don't go to the UK.

    Better get on to the Journal.ie. What do you think it is?


  • Options
    #9195
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    according to this in 2015 it was only 12%:

    http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/irl/

    And according to the CSO it was 14%. Damn lies.


  • Options
    #9196
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Water John wrote: »
    It's a real Trumpian move, to blame Gina Millar for Parliament passing Article 50.


    Nothing to do with it so again another lie.

    Sorry about the Express but this is the shortened video as the one on youtube is 10 mins long.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/821124/Brexiteer-MP-Remainer-Gina-Miller-Brexit-Rees-Mogg


  • Options
    #9197
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,294 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    36% of Ireland's exports go to the UK. Excluding the UK, Ireland exports more to the EU than to the UK. 44% of the UK's exports go to the EU. 16% of the EU's exports go to Britain.

    If a hard Brexit happens, we will still have full access to our largest market. The UK will not.

    Your figures are off....
    Below is a list showcasing 15 of Ireland’s top trading partners in terms of Irish export sales. That is, countries that imported the most Irish shipments by dollar value during 2016. Also shown is each import country’s percentage of total Irish exports.
    1. United States: US$33.2 billion (25.9% of total Irish exports)
    2. United Kingdom: $16.3 billion (12.7%)
    3. Belgium: $16.3 billion (12.7%)
    4. Germany: $8.4 billion (6.6%)
    5. Switzerland: $6.9 billion (5.4%)
    6. Netherlands: $6.5 billion (5.1%)
    7. France: $5.4 billion (4.2%)
    8. China: $3.3 billion (2.6%)
    9. Spain: $3.2 billion (2.5%)
    10. Japan: $3.1 billion (2.4%)
    11. Italy: $2.6 billion (2.1%)
    12. Australia: $1.6 billion (1.3%)
    13. Israel: $1.6 billion (1.3%)
    14. Poland: $1.5 billion (1.2%)
    15. Mexico: $1.5 billion (1.2%)

    Per the worlds top exporters site as of Feb 2017.


  • Options
    #9198
    An Ciarraioch
    Registered Users Posts: 5,805 ✭✭✭An Ciarraioch


    Stats for April 2017:

    http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gei/goodsexportsandimportsapril2017/


  • Options
    #9199
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    Your figures are off....



    Per the worlds top exporters site as of Feb 2017.

    This is fun. It seems your figures are also off as they don't tally with the CSO's figures. For instance, your figures state that exports to the US is double that of exports to the UK. The CSO makes it €30 billion (25.8%) and €13 billion (11.5%). I'd trust the CSO myself.


  • Options
    #9200
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,022 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    What's the best possible outcome for us? I'm thinking UK in the customs union but outside single market could actually see Ireland in a better position as the financial institutions would still possibly need to relocate and perhaps we might even attract other industries from the UK who focus on selling into the EU.

    The customs union would mean no customs checks at the borders and we could continue shipping through the UK without going back to TIR.

    We'd also be able to attract more of the top euro talent as the UK is increasingly perceived as xenophobic and people simply don't feel welcome there.


  • Options
    #9201
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    murphaph wrote: »
    What's the best possible outcome for us?

    Everybody steps back.

    Goes to a trading block and does away with EU court and introduces own laws again for own countries.

    Does away with EU parliament..........but I have a feeling they will not let you do that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9202
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    123shooter wrote: »
    Everybody steps back.

    Goes to a trading block and does away with EU court and introduces own laws again for own countries.

    Does away with EU parliament..........but I have a feeling they will not let you do that.

    I dunno. The EU has brought many good societal changes to Ireland via legislation. Personally, I'm happy with the amount of influence institutions such as the ECHR and ECJ has over Ireland.


  • Options
    #9203
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,708 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    murphaph wrote: »
    What's the best possible outcome for us? I'm thinking UK in the customs union but outside single market could actually see Ireland in a better position as the financial institutions would still possibly need to relocate and perhaps we might even attract other industries from the UK who focus on selling into the EU.

    The customs union would mean no customs checks at the borders and we could continue shipping through the UK without going back to TIR.

    We'd also be able to attract more of the top euro talent as the UK is increasingly perceived as xenophobic and people simply don't feel welcome there.

    I think that even if the UK stay in the single market, the financial outfits are still goosed as they lose passporting. Whether they just go for brass plate operations within the EU and have back office operations in London or the large players move lock stock and barrel to EU centres followed by the minnows is yet to play out.

    I think there is much planning going on in the City of London - much of it contingency - the rest of it long term.


  • Options
    #9204
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I dunno. The EU has brought many good societal changes to Ireland via legislation. Personally, I'm happy with the amount of influence institutions such as the ECHR and ECJ has over Ireland.

    But thats why i said reintroduce own laws again.

    If the USA has a constitution/bill of rights then why cant similar be introduced for every country to suit. If they objected then they cant be working for the people.


  • Options
    #9205
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,372 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    123shooter wrote: »
    But thats why i said reintroduce own laws again.

    If the USA has a constitution/bill of rights then why cant similar be introduced for every country to suit. If they objected then they cant be working for the people.

    I think we would, like many countries, revert to being quite insular. It seems to me that all countries benefit from the diversity of having 28 countries forming legal opinion rather than one.


  • Options
    #9206
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,453 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Our exports to the US are distorted by American Pharma and Electronic Cos.


  • Options
    #9207
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Water John wrote:
    Our exports to the US are distorted by American Pharma and Electronic Cos.

    What's the distortion?


  • Options
    #9208
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,453 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Goods in, goods out.
    Gives a big turnover, not much use to the country other than the jobs.


  • Options
    #9209
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Water John wrote:
    Goods in, goods out. Gives a big turnover, not much use to the country other than the jobs.


    Other than the jobs... I see.

    We have a €36 billion trade surplus with the US.


  • Options
    #9210
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    123shooter wrote: »
    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I dunno. The EU has brought many good societal changes to Ireland via legislation. Personally, I'm happy with the amount of influence institutions such as the ECHR and ECJ has over Ireland.

    But thats why i said reintroduce own laws again.

    If the USA has a constitution/bill of rights then why cant similar be introduced for every country to suit. If they objected then they cant be working for the people.

    We in Ireland have a constitution. So do most EU countries.

    We do write our own laws. The Dail is live streamed so that you can see our own laws being debated and voted on.

    What you are suggesting we *could* do we already do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9211
    123shooter
    Registered Users Posts: 964 ✭✭✭123shooter


    Calina wrote: »
    We in Ireland have a constitution. So do most EU countries.

    We do write our own laws. The Dail is live streamed so that you can see our own laws being debated and voted on.

    What you are suggesting we *could* do we already do.

    I mean rights not laws which can be overturned by EU which is higher. Citizens rights should never be overturned by anybody.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement