Brexit discussion thread IV

trellheim

The comparison to the Irish Independence situation is weak

theres more than a few parallels. One man's misguided thinking is another mans right -thinking - which has us where we are today. What I am trying to do is to see from the other side , otherwise it'll be complete echo chamber stuff.

Bit cynical

trellheim wrote: »

theres more than a few parallels. One man's misguided thinking is another mans right -thinking - which has us where we are today. What I am trying to do is to see from the other side , otherwise it'll be complete echo chamber stuff.

I think it is always going to be somewhat one-sided on this forum. It is primarily Irish posters like myself here and it is not in our interest to have Brexit occurring as we will be adversely affected.

Peregrinus

trellheim wrote: »

theres more than a few parallels. One man's misguided thinking is another mans right -thinking - which has us where we are today. What I am trying to do is to see from the other side , otherwise it'll be complete echo chamber stuff.

There are parallels, but there are also differences, and the differences are crucial. In particular, British government in Ireland was essentially colonial and did not rest on any principle of consent. The EU is the complete opposite in both these respects.

I too am interested to understand the Brexiter position, but I have yet to see a reasoned case for Brexit that stands up to any scrutiny. It seems to me that support for Brexit must be primarily emotional, but I don't understand the emotions involved.

Water John

Spain, Portugal, France, Belgium and The Netherlands were colonisers also.
Yes the years of anti Eu shouting combined with Osbourne's years of austerity made it ripe for an No vote.

serfboard

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

We had worse austerity and were actually run by troika so I don't buy austerity argument. The cause is the rabid tabloid media (Murdoch owned)

Economic argument makes no sense as Brexit would prolong austerity

They're actually linked. If your economic situation has declined in the last decade or two, you might wonder why. The tax-avoiding/evading millionaires and billionaires, who have benefitted massively from gloablisation at your expense, don't want you to start coming after them, so, via their publishing empires they tell you, day after day, that "It's all the bleedin' forners fault - init?"

So if we kick the foreigners out, by "taking back control of our borders", things will get better, see? Simples.

flutered

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think it's more a question of what the logistics companies here have asked for.
The French ports are smaller and further from core markets and also likely to be clogged with freight delays due to brexit. They're also highly prone to industrial action.

Connecting to big Dutch ports may simply make more sense.

also dunkirk is one of the few contintental ports set up for sanitary inspection, i recon why the eu have decided to have all uk shipping via france is they can control the uk exports

Bit cynical

serfboard wrote: »

They're actually linked. If your economic situation has declined in the last decade or two, you might wonder why. The tax-avoiding/evading millionaires and billionaires, who have benefitted massively from gloablisation at your expense, don't want you to start coming after them, so, via their publishing empires they tell you, day after day, that "It's all the bleedin' forners fault - init?"

So if we kick the foreigners out, by "taking back control of our borders", things will get better, see? Simples.

This does not really answer the question though. It leads to the further question of why do people read those publications as opposed to the Guardian, Mirror etc. which are anti-Brexit? Why are the pro-Brexit papers the popular ones?

Sam Russell

Bit cynical wrote: »

This does not really answer the question though. It leads to the further question of why do people read those publications as opposed to the Guardian, Mirror etc. which are anti-Brexit? Why are the pro-Brexit papers the popular ones?

I think if you look at page three, you might get a clue. Then flip to the back page for the footie.

Also, the red tops use a very limited vocabulary, suited to those less well educated - only basic schooling if you like - short words, short sentences, short paragraphs, and short of difficult ideas. Add to that the high level of gossip about z-list celebrities, and sensationalised stories (many made up) and you get a fabric of false news, fake news, and meaningless tittle-tattle, but most of all, the latest news on the footie.

What is there not to like? Particularly if you only go as far as page three, and then the back page.

Capt'n Midnight

Good times ahead.

The UK may have to allow EEA countries to keep using electronic gates after they leave. So EU ctizens are likely to get fast tracked even if there's a Hard Brexit.

Heathrow Airport passport queues reach 2.5 hours

On 30 of 31 days in July, the border force missed its target of a 45-minute wait or less for 95% of visitors from outside the European Economic Area.

Bit cynical

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think if you look at page three, you might get a clue. Then flip to the back page for the footie.

Also, the red tops use a very limited vocabulary, suited to those less well educated - only basic schooling if you like - short words, short sentences, short paragraphs, and short of difficult ideas. Add to that the high level of gossip about z-list celebrities, and sensationalised stories (many made up) and you get a fabric of false news, fake news, and meaningless tittle-tattle, but most of all, the latest news on the footie.

What is there not to like? Particularly if you only go as far as page three, and then the back page.

Sure, but The Sun is not the only red top. The Mirror for example told its readers to vote against Brexit. Also I doubt page 3 is the draw it once was. Basically, the Sun is pro-Brexit because it sells newspapers.

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think if you look at page three, you might get a clue. Then flip to the back page for the footie.

Also, the red tops use a very limited vocabulary, suited to those less well educated - only basic schooling if you like - short words, short sentences, short paragraphs, and short of difficult ideas. Add to that the high level of gossip about z-list celebrities, and sensationalised stories (many made up) and you get a fabric of false news, fake news, and meaningless tittle-tattle, but most of all, the latest news on the footie.

What is there not to like? Particularly if you only go as far as page three, and then the back page.

There's been no page 3 boobies for years at this stage. 2015 as per wiki

kunst nugget

BonnieSituation wrote: »

There's been no page 3 boobies for years at this stage. 2015 as per wiki

And that was the cause of Brexit! When they came after our straight bananas, we said nothing; when they made our vacuum cleaners less powerful, we stood by meekly but when they took away our page 3 girls, we could take no more...

Strazdas

Bit cynical wrote: »

Sure, but The Sun is not the only red top. The Mirror for example told its readers to vote against Brexit. Also I doubt page 3 is the draw it once was. Basically, the Sun is pro-Brexit because it sells newspapers.

The Mirror has only around a third the circulation of The Sun.

Britain is a surprisingly right wing country....around 80% of newspaper sales are of right wing newspapers.

BonnieSituation

kunst nugget wrote: »

And that was the cause of Brexit! When they came after our straight bananas, we said nothing; when they made our vacuum cleaners less powerful, we stood by meekly but when they took away our page 3 girls, we could take no more...

We've been looking at this the wrong way all along....

Breast exit = BREXIT

We're through the looking glass people.

---

So what's this weeks POA over the water? Are we expecting anything?

Bit cynical

Strazdas wrote: »

The Mirror has only around a third the circulation of The Sun.

Britain is a surprisingly right wing country....around 80% of newspaper sales are of right wing newspapers.

Circulation is not the same as availablity though. The Mirror, although fewer people chose to buy it, is just as available as The Sun.

The point here is that people buy the newspapers that reinforce their preexisting views. A Remain supporting teacher, for example, is going to buy the Guardian rather than the Telegraph. If the Guardian started publishing pro-Brexit articles and editorials they would lose readers.

The influence goes both ways. Newspapers, whilst they influence, also try to assess their readers views, otherwise their readers are alienated and they lose circulation.

Rjd2

Bit cynical wrote: »

This does not really answer the question though. It leads to the further question of why do people read those publications as opposed to the Guardian, Mirror etc. which are anti-Brexit? Why are the pro-Brexit papers the popular ones?

Guardian is expensive compared to the others and to to be fair has a really strong online presence. Also the danger you may read an Owen Jones piece by accident.:eek::eek:

It like The Times has never been aimed at the masses either.

The Mirror is not very good really.

On Brexit, its easy to forget the Sunday Mail backed remain, while the Northern star the most prominent left wing paper out there ultimately backed remain.

Looking a the leave voter base, it obviously won with the grey vote coming out in droves, but it had plenty of support across the board, heck 30% of BAME voters voted leave.

Akrasia

Strazdas wrote: »

The Mirror has only around a third the circulation of The Sun.

Britain is a surprisingly right wing country....around 80% of newspaper sales are of right wing newspapers.

And papers like the telegraph pretend to be broadsheets but peddle the same racist misinformation as the mail, just using longer words

kunst nugget

Rjd2 wrote: »

Guardian is expensive compared to the others and to to be fair has a really strong online presence. Also the danger you may read an Owen Jones piece by accident.:eek::eek:

The Guardian have some fantastic articles, especially their Long Reads, but some of the stuff posted under the Comment is Free banner is the ruination of them in terms of online presence imo.

Charles Babbage

There was an interesting article in the FT making the point that Britain was lagging in productivity behind other developed nations.

They also had a table about skills. The notable thing here is that England is the only place where skills have not improved much over time.



Notably NI is not like this, but is less prosperous than England, which suiggests its political arrangements are not correct. Both parts of this island need to improve to catch up on places like NL.

Water John

Could it be possible that older people in the UK have high level skills but those skills are obslete as those enterprises have left the UK?
I can be skilled and unemployed. An older skilled person may not find work again.

trellheim

So what's this weeks POA over the water? Are we expecting anything?

markets and politicians on holidays (unless you've turkish lira to sell) .

Was talking to a senior person on the plane home last night who was in Brussels very recently and there is a just plain do not care aspect about it all . This is really scary , I'd expect no A50 relief on that side unless explicitly requested. I can't see that happening with either of the likely makeups of uk.gov (even in a post GE scenario). I cannot see a 2nd ref either .

Put another way : no a50 relief and no agreement on the outstanding matters by 18 October ( next EUCON) means full on catapult hard brexit, so we've 8 weeks of a burning fuse.

Just so you know.

LuckyLloyd

The last couple of week's politics news in the UK have been characterized by attempts to make mountains out of molehills over both the "antisemitism" in the Labour party and Johnson's latest choice remarks - this time about the Burka. Nothing of substance seems to be occurring on the greatest existential crisis the United Kingdom has faced since World War II.

Rjd2

kunst nugget wrote: »

The Guardian have some fantastic articles, especially their Long Reads, but some of the stuff posted under the Comment is Free banner is the ruination of them in terms of online presence imo.

Those articles keep AH alive though.:o

Rjd2

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The last couple of week's politics news in the UK have been characterized by attempts to make mountains out of molehills over both the "antisemitism" in the Labour party and Johnson's latest choice remarks - this time about the Burka. Nothing of substance seems to be occurring on the greatest existential crisis the United Kingdom has faced since World War II.

I think both are pretty bad. Johnson was not trying to open a debate, it was a cheap nasty shot and essentially testing the waters for Muslim bashing.

Corbyn has been dire last few days, literally saying something did not happen which there is footage of happening. It won't harm him as his base like the Trump base are dangerously obsessed with there Messiah.

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1029081309916921856

lawred2

Charles Babbage wrote: »

There was an interesting article in the FT making the point that Britain was lagging in productivity behind other developed nations.

They also had a table about skills. The notable thing here is that England is the only place where skills have not improved much over time.



Notably NI is not like this, but is less prosperous than England, which suiggests its political arrangements are not correct. Both parts of this island need to improve to catch up on places like NL.

It's good that we're improving but I'd still consider our overall position to be very disappointing - %20+ 16-24 year olds with low numeracy or literacy skills is very poor.

kunst nugget

Rjd2 wrote: »

Those articles keep AH alive though.:o

That's the truth. Sometimes you get the feeling the people are writing that nonsense so that they'll get that warm, fuzzy feeling of being victimised in the comments section.

Rjd2

kunst nugget wrote: »

That's the truth. Sometimes you get the feeling the people are writing that nonsense so that they'll get that warm, fuzzy feeling of being victimised in the comments section.

Guardian know what works on the internet, the articles may be silly, but they will reach a bigger audience than the more interesting in depth stuff they write.

The Guardian, New Statesman, FT and The Times are the best publications on the UK. The Spectator while it employs some talented people, it still relies a little to much on lazy click bait also. Hello Brendan O Neil. :P

Its also got Rod Little which is a really really bad thing.

The Telegraph was ok a few years ago, but its not essentially a crap tabloid.

LuckyLloyd

Rjd2 wrote: »

I think both are pretty bad. Johnson was not trying to open a debate, it was a cheap nasty shot and essentially testing the waters for Muslim bashing.

Corbyn has been dire last few days, literally saying something did not happen which there is footage of happening. It won't harm him as his base like the Trump base are dangerously obsessed with there Messiah.

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1029081309916921856

I think both are utterly trivial and irrelevant matters relative to the seismic issue facing the UK. This is party political nonsense ultimately. Johnson is a buffoon, but a racist? Corbyn is not antisemitic in any real way, no more than I am when I say Israel's latest legislation marginalizing Palestinians is ludicrous. And who cares. The obsession over the machinations of these parties has in large part produced the chaos of Brexit. It doesn't matter, it's noise.

Akrasia

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I think both are utterly trivial and irrelevant matters relative to the seismic issue facing the UK. This is party political nonsense ultimately. Johnson is a buffoon, but a racist? Corbyn is not antisemitic in any real way, no more than I am when I say Israel's latest legislation marginalizing Palestinians is ludicrous. And who cares. The obsession over the machinations of these parties has in large part produced the chaos of Brexit. It doesn't matter, it's noise.

The Corbyn Anti Semitic thing is a campaign by Paul Dacre to smear Corbyn with a label that makes it look like both labour and the Tories are just as bad as each other

Corbyn is a leftist, the left have had a long standing tradition of supporting a free Palestine and an end to the blockades and occupation. All Dacre is doing is digging up old photographs where he was in the viscinity of a plaque from 4 years ago, and then claiming that it is because he was paying homage to terrorists, when he was actually there to visit a memorial to victims of an IDF air bombardment.


It's like claiming someone is a Paedophile sympathiser because they walk past a paedophile's house on the way to somewhere else.

And the entire conservative british media are loving it, they get to talk about his denials and his non denials and ask him loaded questions about when he stopped beating his wife because now the story is that Corbyn has denied being an anti semite rather than that he actually is one.

There are certain israeli groups who use the term anti semite as a weapon against anyone who is opposed to their illegal occupation of palestine. It's the easiest smear in the world to make against anyone who stands up for a persecuted people in Gaza and the West bank, but the media are failing in their duty to question whether a pro human rights position constitutes anti semitism just because it is a subsection of jews (zionists) who are accused of being the abusers.

BonnieSituation

Akrasia wrote: »

The Corbyn Anti Semitic thing is a campaign by Paul Dacre to smear Corbyn with a label that makes it look like both labour and the Tories are just as bad as each other

Corbyn is a leftist, the left have had a long standing tradition of supporting a free Palestine and an end to the blockades and occupation. All Dacre is doing is digging up old photographs where he was in the viscinity of a plaque from 4 years ago, and then claiming that it is because he was paying homage to terrorists, when he was actually there to visit a memorial to victims of an IDF air bombardment.


It's like claiming someone is a Paedophile sympathiser because they walk past a paedophile's house on the way to somewhere else.

And the entire conservative british media are loving it, they get to talk about his denials and his non denials and ask him loaded questions about when he stopped beating his wife because now the story is that Corbyn has denied being an anti semite rather than that he actually is one.

There are certain israeli groups who use the term anti semite as a weapon against anyone who is opposed to their illegal occupation of palestine. It's the easiest smear in the world to make against anyone who stands up for a persecuted people in Gaza and the West bank, but the media are failing in their duty to question whether a pro human rights position constitutes anti semitism just because it is a subsection of jews (zionists) who are accused of being the abusers.

When you see the usual reaction to Norman Finkletein (son of holocaust survivors) when he criticises Israel, it gives you an idea of just What's in play here.

I don't like Corbyn. I think he's useless. But I would stop short of the sort of opprobrium he's receiving at the minute.