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 discussion thread IV
Comments
-
Which wouldn't be the first time.Tom Newton Dunn of The Sun said on Sky News in the last hour that he thinks Barnier is talking about the GB-NI route and the British press have completely misinterpreted his comments.
Yes, Barnier is talking about contrtols on goods moving between Britain (the island) and Ireland (the island). He doesn't talk of this as an "Irish sea border" or similar, because that language is dramatic and he is trying to de-dramatize. But if you want to use "border" language, yes, he's talking about an Irish sea border.0 -
Mogg is independently wealthy, with a fortune estimated at over GBP 100 million. The foundation of this was the bonuses he earned during his career as a merchant banker and fund manager in the 1990s and 2000s. He hasn’t worked full-time in the banking sector since being elected to parliament in 2010, but still has a significant equity stake in Somerset Capital Management (which he founded). In addition to his fees as a non-executive director of that firm (15k per month as of July 2018) as an owner of the firm he would also receive a share of its profits, which are undisclosed but likely to be very large. (The firm has USD 8.4 billion under management.) He also owns investment properties in Somerset and London yielding in both cases income in excess of GBP 10k per year but, again, we don’t know how much in excess.Directorships and Speaking engagements? I don't see that as "Swathes of money via his disaster capital company"? - not to mention the prominent remainers (like Tony Blair) who really have turned directorships, consultancies, and speaking engagements into the kind of money that used to only be earned by fund positions..
Besides, has JRM actually taken any directorships related to Brexit? I don't see any, just family holding companies and his non-exec income from Somerset.
Every time he gets a fee of over £100 for a speaking engagement he seems to give it to charity - and there aren't that many of those!
His reactionary political views seem to have been professed long from long before he became so wealthy; he was a “dogmatic Thatcherite” even in secondary school. Yes, his views probably are self-serving, in that he holds political views which, if implemented, will be advantageous to people situated as he is. But he seems to have held these views from an early age and, while they might be founded on ignorance and detached from reality, I don’t think they are rooted in personal greed.
Depends on your point of view. May targetted a hard Brexit in her Lancaster House speech and has been aiming at one ever since. Chequers can be seen either as an attempt to get the hardest Brexit that isn’t actually ruinous to the UK, or an attempt to soften the hard Brexit by a sufficient degree to make it acceptable to the EU. Either way, it’s certainly an attempt to get a hard-ish Brexit.That Chequers is a mess we can agree, but try as I might I can't see it as an elaborate gamble to get a hard Brexit.
Chequers isn’t focussed on the terms of withdrawal (which are to be agreed in the next month or so) but on the future relationship (which is to be agreed after 29 March 2019). Although the UK has accepted this sequencing, they have never been entirely happy with it, and Chequers represented an attempt to start, and hopefully advance, the conversation about the future relationship to a point where at least the broad outline would be substantially agreed by the time the withdrawal agreement had to be signed off.If there is any kind of fix going on, IMO, it is most likely that Chequers is something close to a done deal save for a form of words on Ireland, or alternatively that both the EU & TM have agreed that once Ireland is sorted everything else can be pushed into the transition period provided the UK have stumped up the cash... in other words that Chequers is just a complex compromisey sort of paper that everyone can complain about while the really important things are dealt with for the time being. It does have the redeeming characteristic that everyone seems to hate it equally.
In that regard it has failed. It hasn’t even been accepted by the Tory party, never mind agreed with the EU who are as polite as they can be about it, but who are known to reject its central elements. Nevertheless if May does agreed the tems of a Withdrawal Agreement (which is a whole other story) Chequers may still provide a sufficient fig-leaf for a Tory party willing to ratify it rather than plunging the UK into political and constitutional crisis by rejecting it. But it’s not going to form the basis for the future relationship.0 -
What can I say, it's a difficult year. The milk price is poor, and the girls are eyeing up what there is in the clamp with a hungry look in their eye. You can't give away poorer bullocks.
When that Russian fella rung me up I thought it would be an easy way out..
Quite an odd view for a farmer to invite open trade free for all globalism and all its ills . Don't you think.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »
Mogg is independently wealthy, with a fortune estimated at over GBP 100 million. The foundation of this was the bonuses he earned during his career as a merchant banker and fund manager in the 1990s and 2000s. He hasn’t worked full-time in the banking sector since being elected to parliament in 2010, but still has a significant equity stake in Somerset Capital Management (which he founded). In addition to his fees as a non-executive director of that firm (15k per month as of July 2018) as an owner of the firm he would also receive a share of its profits, which are undisclosed but likely to be very large. (The firm has USD 8.4 billion under management.) He also owns investment properties in Somerset and London yielding in both cases income in excess of GBP 10k per year but, again, we don’t know how much in excess.Directorships and Speaking engagements? I don't see that as "Swathes of money via his disaster capital company"? - not to mention the prominent remainers (like Tony Blair) who really have turned directorships, consultancies, and speaking engagements into the kind of money that used to only be earned by fund positions..
Besides, has JRM actually taken any directorships related to Brexit? I don't see any, just family holding companies and his non-exec income from Somerset.
Every time he gets a fee of over £100 for a speaking engagement he seems to give it to charity - and there aren't that many of those!
His reactionary political views seem to have been professed long from long before he became so wealthy; he was a “dogmatic Thatcherite” even in secondary school. Yes, his views probably are self-serving, in that he holds political views which, if implemented, will be advantageous to people situated as he is. But he seems to have held these views from an early age and, while they might be founded on ignorance and detached from reality, I don’t think they are rooted in personal greed.
Depends on your point of view. May targetted a hard Brexit in her Lancaster House speech and has been aiming at one ever since. Chequers can be seen either as an attempt to get the hardest Brexit that isn’t actually ruinous to the UK, or an attempt to soften the hard Brexit by a sufficient degree to make it acceptable to the EU. Either way, it’s certainly an attempt to get a hard-ish Brexit.That Chequers is a mess we can agree, but try as I might I can't see it as an elaborate gamble to get a hard Brexit.
Chequers isn’t focussed on the terms of withdrawal (which are to be agreed in the next month or so) but on the future relationship (which is to be agreed after 29 March 2019). Although the UK has accepted this sequencing, they have never been entirely happy with it, and Chequers represented an attempt to start, and hopefully advance, the conversation about the future relationship to a point where at least the broad outline would be substantially agreed by the time the withdrawal agreement had to be signed off.If there is any kind of fix going on, IMO, it is most likely that Chequers is something close to a done deal save for a form of words on Ireland, or alternatively that both the EU & TM have agreed that once Ireland is sorted everything else can be pushed into the transition period provided the UK have stumped up the cash... in other words that Chequers is just a complex compromisey sort of paper that everyone can complain about while the really important things are dealt with for the time being. It does have the redeeming characteristic that everyone seems to hate it equally.
In that regard it has failed. It hasn’t even been accepted by the Tory party, never mind agreed with the EU who are as polite as they can be about it, but who are known to reject its central elements. Nevertheless if May does agreed the tems of a Withdrawal Agreement (which is a whole other story) Chequers may still provide a sufficient fig-leaf for a Tory party willing to ratify it rather than plunging the UK into political and constitutional crisis by rejecting it. But it’s not going to form the basis for the future relationship.
JRM not view politically focused on personal greed? He has a history of opposing anything that impacts the tobacco industy and curtains oil exploration because somerset capital has stakes in firms in both those industries.does the man look like a smoker to you? He's as crooked as they come.he stands to make a killing from Brexit.this independent weath theory doesn't stand up to scruity. They said the same about Trump. The problem is from the greedy there's never enough. He has 100 million but maybe he wants a billion.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »Which wouldn't be the first time.
Yes, Barnier is talking about contrtols on goods moving between Britain (the island) and Ireland (the island). He doesn't talk of this as an "Irish sea border" or similar, because that language is dramatic and he is trying to de-dramatize. But if you want to use "border" language, yes, he's talking about an Irish sea border.
It is not entirely unsurprising that the EU is doing the work for the UK. It was clear from the start that there is not a lot of direction on the UK side and they have been asking the EU to come up with a plan to Brexit from the start, even when it was the UK leaving the EU. It is upside down right now, but the EU is showing the UK how a "border" will work when the EU was asking the UK for solutions to that very same border.0 -
Advertisement
-
I suspect you'll find that Somerset Capital also has stakes in renewable energy and alternative energy firms, and in firms that market alternatives to tobacco (whatever they might be).JRM not view politically focused on personal greed? He has a history of opposing anything that impacts the tobacco industy and curtains oil exploration because somerset capital has stakes in firms in both those industries . . .
JRM's votes on these issues are consistent with his long-held Thatcherite distaste for government intervention and regulation of commercial activity. You don't need to a conspiracy theory to explain them. You may think that JRM's views are bizarre, but I see no reason to doubt that they are sincere.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »
I suspect you'll find that Somerset Capital also has stakes in renewable energy and alternative energy firms, and in firms that market alternatives to tobacco (whatever they might be).JRM not view politically focused on personal greed? He has a history of opposing anything that impacts the tobacco industy and curtains oil exploration because somerset capital has stakes in firms in both those industries . . .
JRM's votes on these issues are consistent with his long-held Thatcherite distaste for government intervention and regulation of commercial activity. You don't need to a conspiracy theory to explain them. You may think that JRM's views are bizarre, but I see no reason to doubt that they are sincere.
He has a distaste for Govetnent intervention yet called for and voted for his govenment to intervene militarily in numerous wars and conflicts? This is a man who said abortion is wrong under any circumstances yet profited from shares in an abortion pill company called Kalbe Farma.there's nothing sincere about him.0 -
I said he has a distaste for government intervention in commercial activity. He's very happy with international political intervention, and with intervention on matters of social and sexual morality.He has a distaste for Govetnent intervention yet called for and voted for his govenment to intervene militarily in numerous wars and conflicts? This is a man who said abortion is wrong under any circumstances yet profited from shares in an abortion pill company called Kalbe Farma.there's nothing sincere about him.
Just to be clear, I'm not defending his positions. I disagree with him about virtually everything, and I despise his attitude to Ireland. I just thing you profoundly misunderstand him if you try to explain his positions purely in terms of his financial interests. And if you fail to understand the people you have to deal with, your chances of dealing effectively with them are greatly reduced.
(As we have daily proof in the shambolic parade of inpeptitude and incompetence that is the British engagement in the Brexit negotiations. In fact, your analysis of JRM's motivations has eerie parallels with the Brexiter analysis of the EU as an organisation that acts at the bidding of German motor manufacturers.)0 -
JRM not view politically focused on personal greed? He has a history of opposing anything that impacts the tobacco industy and curtains oil exploration because somerset capital has stakes in firms in both those industries.does the man look like a smoker to you? He's as crooked as they come.he stands to make a killing from Brexit.this independent weath theory doesn't stand up to scruity. They said the same about Trump. The problem is from the greedy there's never enough. He has 100 million but maybe he wants a billion.
He is not from a wealthy family though. Yes they were very comfortable growing up and he had a nanny raise him, but we are not talking about the wealth of Donald Trump or even George Osborne or David Cameron. Their parents seemed to be much more wealthy. You have to wonder if this detachment from reality from these politicians are because they were all privately educated at Eton and then went to Oxford or Cambridge as a result.
All of them seemed to have grown up in a bubble at least away from the masses. It's ironic that a lot of people will follow the likes of Rees Mogg and Osborne or Cameron or Johnson over a cliff but they will belittle someone like Labour MP Angela Rayner because she doesn't sound smart, yet she will have more empathy and understanding for their lives in her little toe than those that convey an air of superiority and intellect that come from their entitled upbringing.0 -
The checks will be UK to NI and not NI to Ireland.
EU is ready to make new offer on the Irish border, says BarnierMr Barnier said he was working on a plan to “de-dramatise” the controls that would be necessary in the event of the backstop coming into play.
“We are ready to improve this proposal. Work on the EU side is ongoing.
“We are clarifying which goods arriving in Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK would need to be checked and where, when and by whom these checks could be performed,” he said.
“We can also clarify that most checks can take place away from the border at the company premises or in the markets. We need to de-dramatise the checks that are needed.”0 -
Advertisement
-
That's just a sea border.0
-
-
-
That's just a sea border.Zubeneschamali wrote: »Ssssh! You'll re-dramatize it!Peregrinus wrote: »Shh! We don't use the B-word!
It's a series of technical checks and controls. It is done on the frontier between 2 countries or territories but apparently not a border.
If the UK agrees to this it will really show how bad their situation is. This is nothing more or less than people knew the position was from the start.0 -
It'll be done away from the frontier, but in connection with or in consequence of the movement of goods across the frontier.0
-
listermint wrote: »Quite an odd view for a farmer to invite open trade free for all globalism and all its ills . Don't you think.
There are plenty of open minded farmers around, and we are all used to putting our own immediate financial interests second when it comes to decision making.0 -
-
listermint wrote: »Irish farmers would get hammered with your view of the world.
I doubt many if any share your point of view.
I'm not sure that I have articulated any point of view here, save that JRM is - contrary to the reactionary opinions expressed on here - just about the last man to be acting from venal self interest.
Having said that you would be surprised at the number of Irish farmers who dislike the EU (bear in mind that we are among those who suffer the unintended consequences of poor regulation in our daily lives) .. including many who would rather see an end to EU subsidy and the distortions it produces.
You will recall that British farmers didn't carry much of a torch for remain either.0 -
Bit of a difference, though. British farmers have a home market which will consume all that they produce, and still demand more.I'm not sure that I have articulated any point of view here, save that JRM is - contrary to the reactionary opinions expressed on here - just about the last man to be acting from venal self interest.
Having said that you would be surprised at the number of Irish farmers who dislike the EU (bear in mind that we are among those who suffer the unintended consequences of poor regulation in our daily lives) .. including many who would rather see an end to EU subsidy and the distortions it produces.
You will recall that British farmers didn't carry much of a torch for remain either.
Irish farmers don't. They are crucially dependent on being free to export their produce to other countries, esp. other EU countries, without tariff or non-tariff barriers. This matters at least as much to them as EU agricultural supports do.0 -
I'm not sure that I have articulated any point of view here, save that JRM is - contrary to the reactionary opinions expressed on here - just about the last man to be acting from venal self interest.
You surely can't believe that, can you?In line with other Brexiters, Jacob Rees-Mogg seems to have abandoned any notion of the UK being better off after Brexit. Of course he still spouts verbiage about Brexit providing a great economic opportunity for the country, but when pushed, as he was recently, it seems clear that he no longer believes leaving the EU will bring us economic benefit, and says we may be waiting 50 years for the “Brexit dividend”, if it ever arrives at all.
So what’s the game? Why would a politician representing the good people of North East Somerset – whose livelihoods depend on the stability of our economy and who would be devastated by the no-deal Brexit he is happy to promote – seemingly behave so irresponsibly? Could it perhaps have something to do with personal economic gain rather than national economic opportunities?
Rees-Mogg’s hedge fund, Somerset Capital Management, is managed via subsidiaries in the tax havens of the Cayman Islands and Singapore. He has defended the use of such tax havens, saying “I do not believe people have any obligation to pay more tax than the law requires.” And the laws that look set to stand in the way are planned new EU regulations aimed at governing the behaviour of companies such as his own.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/24/no-deal-brexit-poorer-jacob-rees-mogg-dividend0 -
Advertisement
-
kunst nugget wrote: »You surely can believe that, can you?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/24/no-deal-brexit-poorer-jacob-rees-mogg-dividend
Leaving aside the irony that the newspaper you are quoting from is controlled from a tax minimizing Cayman islands structure, and that two JRM funds have now located in a third tax haven (Dublin)...
No I don't believe that taxpayers should pay more tax than is legally due. Do you?
I'm also pretty strongly of the opinion that (international) tax competition helps keep Governments more honest and countries more competitive as well as providing opportunities for smaller countries to leverage technology to their advantage and provide employment for significant numbers of well educated youngsters who might otherwise emigrate.0 -
Yeah, but you didn't answer the question. What is the reasoning behind an MP, elected to serve the best interests of his constituency, acting in a fashion that all reports would indicate will actually have a negative effect?
You may recall the £350m pw on the side of a bus. Now it turns out the argument isn't about economics, or the NHS, at all, but about sovereignty. Which is great because it is one of those concepts that is very hard to define and measure.
In addition, people like Liam FOx, are touting a trade deal with the US which would mean dropping all sorts of conditions and accepting US rules in lots of areas, not sure how that tallies with sovereignty.
So people like JRM may well be doing this out of some ideology, but that doesn't make it any less harm full or wrong. It may well be that he may not indeed stand to gain much either way, although it would appear otherwise, but even if he doesn't, he is in a financial position that he will be able to ride out any negative effects and as such it is not much of a gamble to him.
To the car workers, the people that work in FDI's, farmers, millions across the economy, they do not have that, and will have to deal with the consequences themselves. We have already seen a fall off in growth. People like JRM have been quick to rubbish that on the basis that there is still growth, but that loss of growth will have resulted in someone not getting a new job, or a promotion, or a payrise. That will cost that person for years to come. To so easily brush that loss aside as if it is nothing shows the thought process of these people0 -
Leaving aside the irony that the newspaper you are quoting from is controlled from a tax minimizing Cayman islands structure, and that two JRM funds have now located in a third tax haven (Dublin)...
No I don't believe that taxpayers should pay more tax than is legally due. Do you?
I'm also pretty strongly of the opinion that (international) tax competition helps keep Governments more honest and countries more competitive as well as providing opportunities for smaller countries to leverage technology to their advantage and provide employment for significant numbers of well educated youngsters who might otherwise emigrate.
We're talking about JRM being the last person to act out of venal self interest though, aren't we?
Jacob Rees-Mogg is a long-term backer of investment management firm Somerset Capital, an emerging markets investment firm.
Jacob Rees-Mogg joined other Eurosceptics calling for a “clean” separation with the EU so the UK has the freedom to strike new trade deals.
Moves to create barriers to trade with the EU would force UK companies to strike up deals elsewhere, directly profiting companies backing the emerging markets.
Hmm, I wonder who could benefit from that. It's a tricky one. Obviously, it wouldn't be JRM - that would be venal self interest for him to benefit like that...
https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2018/02/08/2198570/jacob-rees-moggs-huge-personal-windfall-after-brexit/
Funny thing is that his father wrote a book on how to make money in a time of economic crisis. But, of course, JRM wouldn't have contemplated anything like that because he'd never act out of venal self interest.
https://twitter.com/nickkehoe01/status/1024909617682362368?lang=en0 -
In addition, people like Liam FOx, are touting a trade deal with the US which would mean dropping all sorts of conditions and accepting US rules in lots of areas, not sure how that tallies with sovereignty.
Here is a link to those proposals.
Rightwing thinktanks unveil radical plan for US-UK Brexit trade dealA radical blueprint for a free trade deal between the UK and the US that would see the NHS opened to foreign competition, a bonfire of consumer and environmental regulations and freedom of movement between the two countries for workers, is to be launched by prominent Brexiters.
The blueprint will be seen as significant because of the close links between the organisations behind it and the UK secretary for international trade, Liam Fox, and the US president, Donald Trump.
I don't know why but it seems the news today is a little like the weather outside, wild and windy. I doubt this is what people was thinking about when they voted to leave the EU. They surely didn't vote to go from one paymaster to another, but one that doesn't care about workers or the ordinary person.
And yet people will double down because we don't like to be told we are stupid or are wrong. It's funny that a lot of people are quick to bemoan the PC world we live in now, yet it is not possible to tell someone they were fooled by the scam of Brexit. You have to tell them that anyone could have fallen for the trick of Brexit and its lies, otherwise they will double down and just run straight ahead whatever is in the way.0 -
Next big conundrum, what's involved in a "set of technical checks and controls" that will satisfy Brussels , sounds like the brits might be getting their way a bit now, borris will be contented0
-
Sassygirl1999 wrote: »Next big conundrum, what's involved in a "set of technical checks and controls" that will satisfy Brussels , sounds like the brits might be getting their way a bit now, borris will be contented
I don't know where you seem to be getting the belief that the EU are caving on issues.0 -
Sassygirl1999 wrote: »Next big conundrum, what's involved in a "set of technical checks and controls" that will satisfy Brussels , sounds like the brits might be getting their way a bit now, borris will be contented
Wrong. It’s the same EU proposal with the language changed so it can be touted as a win in the U.K.0 -
kunst nugget wrote: »I don't know where you seem to be getting the belief that the EU are caving on issues.
The EU's negotiator has now shifted his tone, saying he is ready to offer new proposals to help break the deadlock0 -
It will, in effect, mean that the UK are checking the rules decreed by the EU. There might be some acceptance of divergent regulations, but in terms of the overall the effect will be that the UK will retain the same rules they have now. The only way around it would be to be able to operate two distinct customs controls, one for EU and one for non-EU, and have some verifiable way to show that the Non-EU goods are not going through the NI border.
Chequers already has this, except it went a step further and just accepted the EU rules. The EU have also not given any indication (in fact the exact opposite) that they are willing to allow divergence in terms of services
This is exactly the position they were in 18 months ago!0 -
Advertisement
-
I'm not sure that I have articulated any point of view here, save that JRM is - contrary to the reactionary opinions expressed on here - just about the last man to be acting from venal self interest.
Having said that you would be surprised at the number of Irish farmers who dislike the EU (bear in mind that we are among those who suffer the unintended consequences of poor regulation in our daily lives) .. including many who would rather see an end to EU subsidy and the distortions it produces.
You will recall that British farmers didn't carry much of a torch for remain either.
Au contraire. JRM was educated and raised in a fog of Little Englander nonsense. His 'world view' is of an England where everyone knows their place and England rules the waves. An England of the 1930s. He cares not a whit for the economic and social wellbeing of ordinary English people.
If we disregard any selfish monetary motives (we shouldn't but anyway) then his primary motivation is to preserve a class-ridden England devoid of Johnny Foreigners and create a laissez faire economy which will benefit the rich even further. It is the pursuit of an impossible utopian and idealistic dream that serves the elite to the detriment of society as a whole. This is utterly venal and selfish for any politician.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement