Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

SilverFox2

DubInMeath wrote: »

Would you prefer the U.S. alternative?

The US alternative is the reason Hillary did not get Presidency following Obamas dismal record on health

SilverFox2

SilverFox2 wrote: »

The US alternative is the reason Hillary did not get Presidency following Obamas dismal record on health

Health in the U.S.has been ****ed for a lot longer than before Obama, also still no sign of a health care plan from the current potus apart from trying to get obamacare as it's know overturned in the courts.

SilverFox2

DubInMeath wrote: »

Health in the U.S.has been ****ed for a lot longer than before Obama, also still no sign of a health care plan from the current potus apart from trying to get obamacare as it's know overturned in the courts.

Agreed that Obama is not solely responsible for the system but he did a hell of a lot to leave it in a bad state during his tenure

ancapailldorcha

SilverFox2 wrote: »

Agreed that Obama is not solely responsible for the system but he did a hell of a lot to leave it in a bad state during his tenure

He tried to fix it but the Senate was always going to block any real change. The Americans don't want anything like the NHS but they need to make big changes. The problem is their corporate lobbies are going to kill that stone dead.

SilverFox2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

He tried to fix it but the Senate was always going to block any real change. The Americans don't want anything like the NHS but they need to make big changes. The problem is their corporate lobbies are going to kill that stone dead.

The US Senate have lots to answer for. We will see this during 2020 for the impeachment

Padre_Pio

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

He tried to fix it but the Senate was always going to block any real change. The Americans don't want anything like the NHS but they need to make big changes. The problem is their corporate lobbies are going to kill that stone dead.

Americans don't want free healthcare.

The idea that they pay for something that benefits someone else is socialist. Given the choice between having no healthcare or having health insurance garnished from your wages, most would choose no healthcare.

This is a cultural thing.

SilverFox2

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Americans don't want free healthcare.

The idea that they pay for something that benefits someone else is socialist. Given the choice between having no healthcare or having health insurance garnished from your wages, most would choose no healthcare.

This is a cultural thing.

I believe this is accurate alright

Love thy flag, not thy neighbour.

davedanon

I'm in my mid-50s, with three children. Have had one extended stay in hospital, for appendicitis that got complicated. All three kids were born in public wards. One child got pneumonia at 6 months and spent a week in intensive care. Various other calamities befell us, all the usual stuff, nothing major. All this provided foc, or if there were some charges they were so small as to be irrelevant. The care I and my family received was top-class and exemplary for the most part. Earlier this year a decade of running caught up with me and I had to have an arthroscopy. It cost 4-5k, and it was provided, again all but free, up in Belfast under the Cross-Border Directive.

I had no, and have never had, private health cover. Reckon I've saved about 75k over the years.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Did anyone ever think that this would be an easy process?

My feeling from 2016 was that Brexit would never take place because the EU would create such a political quagmire around the situation that the Brits would relent and vote again. This how the EU operate, we've seen it here on a lesser scale with the Lisbon Treaty.


It's also done to disuade any other member from attempting to democraticly leave the Union.

Imreoir2

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Did anyone ever think that this would be an easy process?

My feeling from 2016 was that Brexit would never take place because the EU would create such a political quagmire around the situation that the Brits would relent and vote again. This how the EU operate, we've seen it here on a lesser scale with the Lisbon Treaty.


It's also done to disuade any other member from attempting to democraticly leave the Union.

I would say that the EU has been reletivly straight forward about the whole thing and any element of a quagmire has eminated from the British side through their consistant amaturism and broken political system.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Did anyone ever think that this would be an easy process?

My feeling from 2016 was that Brexit would never take place because the EU would create such a political quagmire around the situation that the Brits would relent and vote again. This how the EU operate, we've seen it here on a lesser scale with the Lisbon Treaty.


It's also done to disuade any other member from attempting to democraticly leave the Union.

What do you think the EU has done to create a political quagmire?

Padre_Pio

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I would say that the EU has been reletivly straight forward about the whole thing and any element of a quagmire has eminated from the British side through their consistant amaturism and broken political system.

And total lack of planning and forethought.

"The people of this country have had enough of experts!"

cryptocurrency

davedanon wrote: »

I'm in my mid-50s, with three children. Have had one extended stay in hospital, for appendicitis that got complicated. All three kids were born in public wards. One child got pneumonia at 6 months and spent a week in intensive care. Various other calamities befell us, all the usual stuff, nothing major. All this provided foc, or if there were some charges they were so small as to be irrelevant. The care I and my family received was top-class and exemplary for the most part. Earlier this year a decade of running caught up with me and I had to have an arthroscopy. It cost 4-5k, and it was provided, again all but free, up in Belfast under the Cross-Border Directive.

I had no, and have never had, private health cover. Reckon I've saved about 75k over the years.

Under 18's should get free healthcare as they are not responsible if their parents don't get it for them but as adults healthcare should be paid for like a service.

And the tax take should be in peoples pockets

Imreoir2

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Under 18's should get free healthcare as they are not responsible if their parents don't get it for them but as adults healthcare should be paid for like a service.

And the tax take should be in peoples pockets

That kind of system would lead to worse health outcomes accross society and as such is rightly rejected in most parts of the developed world.

seamus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Under 18's should get free healthcare as they are not responsible if their parents don't get it for them but as adults healthcare should be paid for like a service.

And if they don't pay for it, they should be left to die in the streets, right? And their family billed for the cost of collecting and disposing of the body. That's the libertarian ideal.

davedanon

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Under 18's should get free healthcare as they are not responsible if their parents don't get it for them but as adults healthcare should be paid for like a service.

And the tax take should be in peoples pockets

The problem with libertarianism is its fúck you, I'm-alright-Jack uncaring attitude to everyone else. Although its probably what attracts you to it.

There are thousands of miles of roads built you'll never use, crypto. Libraries you'll never borrow a book from. To what extent do you believe we should get rebates for what we don't use?

boring accountant

First Up wrote: »

An emphatic no to that. The EU does not play games. Barnier and his team acted on behalf of the 27 member states and to the letter of the treaties - nothing else.

The UK's internal politics are its own business. Same for all member states and applicant countries.

You have a very rosy picture of the EU if you think they don’t play politics. Using strategy to keep them in the EU would be well within the remit of the negotiators.

fly_agaric

cryptocurrency wrote: »

US Ambassador to the UK, Woody Johnson, has made a stunning 2020 prediction ahead of the beginning of trade talks between Britain and America in the new year.

The US ambassador has hailed 2020 as an “incredible” year and has called on Prime Minister Boris Johnson and US President Donald Trump to “embrace” the post-Brexit opportunities.

Woody Johnson :pac: and his boss will try & bend the UK's economy over for a right good seeing to in the new decade!

boring accountant

alastair wrote: »

Financial services are easily transferred from one location to another.

For a single business that does not depend on primarily on human capital yes. for an entire industry no. There’s an immense amount of human capital involved in providing most financial services and no other city in Europe comes within a hairs breadth of London.

The things we’ve seen moving to Dublin or Frankfurt are typically low value work or work requiring a low number of employees.

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

In the case of the UK it is very easy to undercut competitors because all they have to do is reduce prices and one way without affecting business but actually causing a boom is to reduce or abolish VAT.

Instantly UK goods become 25% cheaper to other VAT countries which just happen to be EU countries!

That's all fine and dandy, but you forgot about a couple of minor points:

1. UK companies cannot sell to EU companies without a trade deal, none yet in place
2. There are very few UK-only companies that produce goods wanted throughpout Europe
3. Any import of UK goods can be hit with tariffs to immediately wipe out that 25%
4. Any export of EU goods can likewise be taxed heavily to mitigate any potential losses

Honestly, how many Europeans can just switch from cheddar to a different type of cheese versus how many UK residents can switch from Mercs to......um.....jags?

First Up

boring accountant wrote:

You have a very rosy picture of the EU if you think they don’t play politics. Using strategy to keep them in the EU would be well within the remit of the negotiators.

Oh they are acutely aware of national politics. People like Verhofstadt, Junker, Tusk etc know far more about the dynamics of national politics than the UK in particular seem to realise.

But they do NOT interfere in them and you won't find a syllable in anything Barnier has said or written that can be interpreted as encouraging the UK to change its mind.

Unless of course you think the EU should just give the UK a free ride.

alastair

boring accountant wrote: »

For a single business that does not depend on primarily on human capital yes. for an entire industry no. There’s an immense amount of human capital involved in providing most financial services and no other city in Europe comes within a hairs breadth of London.

The things we’ve seen moving to Dublin or Frankfurt are typically low value work or work requiring a low number of employees.

Human capital is a moveable commodity too.

Kidchameleon

Imreoir2 wrote: »

That kind of system would lead to worse health outcomes accross society and as such is rightly rejected in most parts of the developed world.

Any examples of this kind of outcome in the real world?

Donald Trump

fly_agaric wrote: »

Woody Johnson :pac: and his boss will try & bend the UK's economy over for a right good seeing to in the new decade!

I heard that it can be awkward having a Woody Johnson when trying to do a business deal

Imreoir2

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Any examples of this kind of outcome in the real world?

Yeah, the US. If you are wealthy or covered by a company policy you are ok, if not you are screwed. It gives companies significant control over their employees as the loss of a health care plan can be devestating to a family. For those who are not covered, or are unable to access cover for several reasons including pre-existing conditions, their quality of life can be severely compromised.

Health care is a massive worry and a huge burden for huge numbers of Americans. If we were to implement such a system here, it would lead to worse outcomes accross society as a whole.

Imreoir2

Donald Trump wrote: »

I heard that it can be awkward having a Woody Johnson when trying to do a business deal

Presumably it depends on the deal. If you are looking to conclude a transaction in a red light district, it is a significant advantage.

Kidchameleon

First Up wrote: »

But they do NOT interfere in them and you won't find a syllable in anything Barnier has said or written that can be interpreted as encouraging the UK to change its mind.

Ah yeah, Barnier is a saint, he wouldn't do a thing like that... Completely honest and sincere our Michael is :rolleyes:


"EU's Michael Barnier secretly filmed plotting to use Ireland as a Brexit pawn"

Igotadose

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Ah yeah, Barnier is a saint, he wouldn't do a thing like that... Completely honest and sincere our Michael is :rolleyes:


"EU's Michael Barnier secretly filmed plotting to use Ireland as a Brexit pawn"

Who is Michael Barnier? Michel's cousin?