Brexit Referendum Superthread

Suryavarman

Conas wrote: »

Well if you lose or can't find a high paying job. There is plenty of work in the supermarkets, take-away's, McDonald's etc.

What I'm saying is people in Britain can have an income if they want one working in those professions. If the big corporations decide not to invest, because of Brexit. It's pretty much a double edged sword. They will suffer just as much as the people. Which will lead to a coming together to find common ground, and it's business as usual again.
No economic crisis in history has ever lasted, they all run out of steam after a while, and things pick up again.

If there are less jobs in other sectors or the jobs in other sectors are paying less then that adversely effects the availability of jobs and the amount they pay in supermarkets.

All economic crises come to an end but when country's erect trade barriers, like the UK is going to, incomes are reduced as long as those trade barriers are in place. The UK has permanently reduced the incomes of all its citizens by voting to leave the EU.

An Ciarraioch

Patser wrote: »

This article about how Scotland's Nicola Sturgeon has stood out so well is bang on. While Cameron pretty much quit and hid, Johnson went off to play cricket and Corbyn managed to get into an internal party civil war, Sturgeon called an emergency cabinet meeting, clearly laid out her ambitions for Scotland, started looking for ways to block Brexit, has organised a delegation to Brussels to discuss alternatives and today is talking with Gibraltar and Ireland about other alternatives.

Meanwhile Boris wrote an article for the Telegraph which has roundly been dismissed by today's events and the EU.


Article about Sturgeon

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36644777

Tweet about Sturgeon talking with Ireland about options.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/747460217332465664

Will be interesting to see what approach Stormont takes - obviously the FM campaigned for Leave, but if a motion was put before the Assembly to join Sturgeon in talks, there would be a clear Remain majority.

CMOTDibbler

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Will be interesting to see what approach Stormont takes - obviously the FM campaigned for Leave, but if a motion was put before the Assembly to join Sturgeon in talks, there would be a clear Remain majority.

I'm pretty sure it's us she wants to talk to, not Northern Ireland.

An Ciarraioch

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it's us she wants to talk to, not Northern Ireland.

Yes, but the idea so far is that Gib, Scotland and NI would talk to all the EU nations to get diplomatic backing.

Conas

awec wrote: »

Your posts are actually insane.

When people don't have jobs, people have less money. When people have less money they spend less money in shops. When shops make less money they can afford less staff. When shops reduce staff this adds to the unemployment. When unemployment goes up government income goes down. When government income goes down it becomes more difficult to pay out the dole. It is a vicious circle. Jobs are not magically created, McDonald's and Asda don't just randomly hire staff.

"If there are no good jobs they can just work in McDonalds". My goodness.

Well the goverment could change their current monetary system, and put money into production jobs, like building electrical appliances, aeroplanes, motor cars, the day to day things people use. Print money from the Bank of England, and pay the people with it. That way there would be plenty of jobs, and the economy would boom again, and the British economy would become self-sufficient also.

Jobs are very easily created. It requires the next Prime Minister to use his imagination, and show a strong work-ethic.

anothernight

Conas wrote: »

Well the goverment could change their current monetary system, and put money into production jobs, like building electrical appliances, aeroplanes, motor cars, the day to day things people use. Print money from the Bank of England, and pay the people with it. That way there would be plenty of jobs, and the economy would boom again, and the British economy would become self-sufficient also.

Jobs are very easily created. It requires the next Prime Minister to use his imagination, and show a strong work-ethic.

Speechless.

Sam Russell

Conas wrote: »

Well the goverment could change their current monetary system, and put money into production jobs, like building electrical appliances, aeroplanes, motor cars, the day to day things people use. Print money from the Bank of England, and pay the people with it. That way there would be plenty of jobs, and the economy would boom again, and the British economy would become self-sufficient also.

Jobs are very easily created. It requires the next Prime Minister to use his imagination, and show a strong work-ethic.

Have you any idea how much it costs to build a car from scratch, or an aeroplane. The Concorde bankrupted the British/French governments and they had to ditch the TSR2 before it flew.

They had a car industry called Rover but now it is ROver. They built rubbish cars and used poor workers who went on strike so often that models were cancelled before going into production.

Anyway modern cars are built by robots - few jobs there. In fact most manufacturing jobs are just oiling the robots.

Conas

Conas wrote: »

Well the goverment could change their current monetary system, and put money into production jobs, like building electrical appliances, aeroplanes, motor cars, the day to day things people use. Print money from the Bank of England, and pay the people with it. That way there would be plenty of jobs, and the economy would boom again, and the British economy would become self-sufficient also.

Jobs are very easily created. It requires the next Prime Minister to use his imagination, and show a strong work-ethic.

ah.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/06/26/congratulations-to-bolivarian-socialism-venezuela-now-faces-imminent-famine/#11da689b81c0

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

ah.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/06/26/congratulations-to-bolivarian-socialism-venezuela-now-faces-imminent-famine/#11da689b81c0

Reminds me of the Soviet manager of a factory that made sewer pipes. He was asked why they still made pipes of concrete instead of cheaper plastics. His answer was 'Our production goals are measured in tonnes so we can only achieve them with concrete - plastic is too light.'

Suryavarman

Conas wrote: »

Well the goverment could change their current monetary system, and put money into production jobs, like building electrical appliances, aeroplanes, motor cars, the day to day things people use. Print money from the Bank of England, and pay the people with it. That way there would be plenty of jobs, and the economy would boom again, and the British economy would become self-sufficient also.

Jobs are very easily created. It requires the next Prime Minister to use his imagination, and show a strong work-ethic.

The idea of any first world country largely increasing manufacturing employment is fairytale stuff. The days of manufacturing jobs being plentiful are over. The economy has progressed so that we no longer need large amounts of people to work in manufacturing. If you want a decent standard of living these days you go to college, get a degree and then go to work in the service industry.

There is no such thing as economies being self-sufficient anymore. Any attempts at self-sufficiency can only occur by making most of the population far poorer. Globalisation is here to stay and with good reason. Any country trying to ignore that fact is setting themselves up for disaster.

For your bonkers idea of printing money to pay workers, see Venezuela. Such a policy move would annihilate the economy.

awec

This post has been deleted.

Inquitus

Suryavarman wrote: »

The idea of any first world country largely increasing manufacturing employment is fairytale stuff. The days of manufacturing jobs being plentiful are over. The economy has progressed so that we no longer need large amounts of people to work in manufacturing. If you want a decent standard of living these days you go to college, get a degree and then go to work in the service industry.

There is no such thing as economies being self-sufficient anymore. Any attempts at self-sufficiency can only occur by making most of the population far poorer. Globalisation is here to stay and with good reason. Any country trying to ignore that fact is setting themselves up for disaster.

For your bonkers idea of printing money to pay workers, see Venezuela. Such a policy move would annihilate the economy.

Agreed, the UK Manufacturing sector died long ago, the workforce no longer has the skillsets required for it. The global economy has also greatly diminished Manufacturing, where once it created millions of relatively well paid jobs, today it does nothing of the sort. Not to mention the fact that the UK, much like ourselves, is poorly suited to Manufacturing given it is an Island on the fringes of the EU with all the additional transport costs required to bring Raw Materials to the factory floor and export finished goods to their markets. There will be no renaissance of UK Manufacturing, 80% of UK Exports are service based and leaving the EU Single market or ending up with a much less favourable access to it could well decimate this portion of the industry.

This is why there is no plan for Brexit, because the tenets upon which the exit is based are utterly incompatible with negotiating unfettered access to the European Markets, namely restricting the free movement of people and not being required to submit to EU laws and regulations.

awec

This post has been deleted.

Charles Babbage

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Yes, but the idea so far is that Gib, Scotland and NI would talk to all the EU nations to get diplomatic backing.

dnalneerG!

Or Reverse Greenland to you and me.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/adam-ramsay/reverse-greenland-letting-scotland-stay

This would be OK for Scotland, although it could lead to a hard border if England and Wales don't do a Norway type deal (and pointless if they do).
It would work even better in NI where the customs would be at the sea, but how likely are the politicians in that place to get their act together?
Who knows about Gib.

Conas

awec wrote: »

Printing money is bad. You cannot just print money to pay people. Every time the Bank of England prints a £1 every £1 in your pocket reduces in value.

But printing money is what the ECB, Federal Reserve, and Bank Of England are doing now. Quantitative easing is printing money, and putting it into the economy in the hope of stimulating it. The Federal Reserve prints money, and loans it to the US goverment at interest, which leads the goverment more heavily into debt, and bogs down an economy.

You can print money to pay people, IF they end up producing a product that can be sold domestically or in the global market. The currency loses value because of QE, and interest bearing paper currency, because your printing money out of thin air.

djpbarry

Conas wrote: »

Quantitative easing is printing money, and putting it into the economy in the hope of stimulating it.

The key word there is "hope".

There's a reason why central banks are so reluctant to use QE - it's generally seen as a last resort.

Suryavarman

Conas wrote: »

But printing money is what the ECB, Federal Reserve, and Bank Of England are doing now. Quantitative easing is printing money, and putting it into the economy in the hope of stimulating it. The Federal Reserve prints money, and loans it to the US goverment at interest, which leads the goverment more heavily into debt, and bogs down an economy.

You can print money to pay people, IF they end up producing a product that can be sold domestically or in the global market. The currency loses value because of QE, and interest bearing paper currency, because your printing money out of thin air.

Somewhat disingenuous to refer to QE as printing money and equating it to what you propose.

Patser

I'll be curious if England's elimination from the Euros will have any affect on the debate over there. Sport can act as a great boost to a nation's psyche as well as a distraction. So equally an embarrassing exit must stoke discontent, and when a depressed nation now has to face the mess their future has become I can see angry scenes ahead.

Bob24

Patser wrote: »

I'll be curious if England's elimination from the Euros will have any affect on the debate over there. Sport can act as a great boost to a nation's psyche as well as a distraction. So equally an embarrassing exit must stoke discontent, and when a depressed nation now has to face the mess their future has become I can see angry scenes ahead.

I wouldn't expect much of an impact. A great success for national sports will boost morale for a few days/weeks, but a failure just tends to be quickly forgotten.

amacca

mountaintop wrote: »

I am greatly disappointed the U.K voted to leave the European Union, but I won't comment on that now. What I want to comment on are the views of some Irish in Britain. I heard on the Joe Duffy show today an Irish man who has lived in England for 20 years and who voted for Brexit. One of the reasons he gave for this was that 'we want our sovereignty back'. Another Irish in Britain caller, a female, said her two English born sons were unable to get employment because immigrants were taking 'their' jobs. I could go on with plenty of other examples including conversations I've had with relatives and other Irish in Britain.
What I want to say is that I am absolutely disgusted with these comments. As an Irish person who worked in Britain during the 1980's and 90's I feel an affinity with immigrants. I know what it's like to be Irish in Britain during the bad times. Have the Irish in Britain forgotten what this was like? Have they forgotten that they are immigrants themselves? One Irish man when asked this very question during the week on the Sean O'Rourke programme I think it was, answered, 'oh no, we're not immigrants, sure not at all'. Unbelievable. Where did he get that from?
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed working in England and on the whole found the English to be fair and tolerant. But this (latest?) trend among the Irish in Britain (not them all I hope) has me baffled. I would like to ask the Irish man who voted for Brexit because he wanted to get his sovereignty back what, for example, Jeremy Clarkson would say to him. Clarkson might well tell him, get lost Paddy, go back to Ireland for your sovereignty, this is England, and you are neither English or British. And for the first time in my life, though not in those words, I would have to agree with him.

Do you not think the producer lets through a couple of people with this viewpoint to get just such a reaction from the listeners. I was always under the impression a healthy percentage of rabble rabble loo las and parochial myopic headbangers were necessary for a show like Duffys

Billy86

Bob24 wrote: »

Patser wrote: »

I'll be curious if England's elimination from the Euros will have any affect on the debate over there. Sport can act as a great boost to a nation's psyche as well as a distraction. So equally an embarrassing exit must stoke discontent, and when a depressed nation now has to face the mess their future has become I can see angry scenes ahead.

I would wouldn't expect much of an impact. A great success for national sports will boost morale for a few days/weeks, but a failure just tends to be quickly forgotten.

You sir, clearly do not follow the coverage English teams at major football tournaments.

macplaxton

Billy86 wrote: »

You sir, clearly do not follow the coverage English teams at major football tournaments.

Precisely, 50 years of banging on about 1966 gets a bit tiresome.

Billy86

macplaxton wrote: »

Precisely, 50 years of banging on about 1966 gets a bit tiresome.

Good point, though I was thinking 50 weeks of banging on about 'the winker', or 'that ref', or whatever other non English entity they can blame ad nauseum for their own failures.

Owryan

long range shooter wrote: »

Lol so no EU countries have even been involved in Afghanistan?
please correct me if i am wrong.

There is a massive difference between countries that are in the EU deploying troops to Afghanistan and the EU itself deploying troops to Afghanistan.

Its a subtle difference, you may not get it.

Bob24

Billy86 wrote: »

You sir, clearly do not follow the coverage English teams at major football tournaments.

I don't indeed, and I have no doubt football fans will remember it :-) But what I meant is it won't remain a big topic in the general media or a subject of conversation for the average person as much as a victory would have been.

Bob24

When you try to be smart be didn't quite get a subtlety you should really know about :-)

swampgas

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/peter-sutherland-little-reason-to-delay-talks-on-britain-s-eu-exit-1.2701875

"While the options of being a full part of the common market but not being in the EU is not viable (as it would signal the end of the EU itself) we must help to find a way to live harmoniously in a radically changed world.
The protection of our interests, however, must recognise that the real focus of our negotiations has to be fundamentally around the survival of the EU and this means any compromise cannot threaten that survival."

By threatening the stability (indeed the very existence) of the EU, the UK may find itself being sacrificed for the greater good.

This is off the scale, politically, compared to anything else in my lifetime.

Bob24

Bob24 wrote: »

When you try to be smart be didn't quite get a subtlety you should really know about :-)

I think he knew exactly, exactly what he was saying there and it's spot on.

Bob24

Deleted User wrote: »

I think he knew exactly, exactly what he was saying there and it's spot on.

I am sure he did ... Just find it neither helpful nor funny (he must have found it a shame that Wales is still in, it ruined his joke on Brexit number 2 and he had to revert to pretending he didn't know the difference between England and the U.K.).

swampgas

Bob24 wrote: »

I am sure he did ... Just find neither helpful nor funny.

True, but people forget that the other EU leaders and officials are human too. The UK, and Cameron, have been winding them up for years. It must be hard not to let a sly dig fly every now and then.

When you consider the language used by the British press about Europe, which is rarely if ever criticized or even commented on by the British government, Tusk's remark is pretty insignificant.