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

InTheShadows

declanflynn wrote: »

Housing is a difficult one to fix unless we stop young ones getting pregnant shooting to the top of the q and getting a free house

What free houses?

Peregrinus

InTheShadows wrote: »

What free houses?

Did you not know? Declan houses them all for free at his own gaff.

lola85

InTheShadows wrote: »

What free houses?

These ones.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/council-tenants-owe-65m-in-unpaid-rent-437052.html

“Arrears by social housing tenants have doubled in the last eight years, leaving councils owed a staggering €65m in unpaid rent”

declanflynn

Peregrinus wrote: »

InTheShadows wrote: »

What free houses?

Did you not know? Declan houses them all for free at his own gaff.

I don't understand the question

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Same



Old



Bullshit.

How is what you've written above any different to the decades of utter nonsense spewed out by the British press?

Careful Tom, what I posted is pretty much in line with the shinner’s view on Europe (well, it was but their policies seem to be very flexible when it comes to Europe) thinking differently may sever the connection to the collective.

Now, how’s about you doing the decent thing and backing up your statement that it nonsense with telling us all why

FrancieBrady

Has the penny finally dropped? :D

https://twitter.com/SteveBarclay/status/1166765949409812488

The first reply is funny and on point.

Man committed to destroying over 750 agreements with the rest of the planet with #NoDealBrexit, reneging on commitments with our European allies suddenly realises it will destroy our manufacturing.

In other news. Burning down house means the kids get cold and wet.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

Now, how’s about you doing the decent thing and backing up your statement that it nonsense with telling us all why

Well, the "gives us loads of over paid, self important politicians and public servants gives us loads of over paid, self important politicians and public servants" is just a bog-standard whinge that you can make about any government at any level.

The EU is actually a pretty slender organisation. It employs about 46,000 people across all the EU institutions, which sounds like a lot. But bear in mind that they serve a population of over 500 million, and then contrast that with the 34,000 people employed by Birmingham City Council to serve a population of 1.1 million.

The "try and treat us as all being the same and pass legislation based on some form of model eu citizen" jibe is just nonsense. Completely untrue, and - no offence - pretty ignorant. The principle of subsidiarity is deeply entrenched in the EU legal system - the principle that decisions should be taken at the lowest appropriate level. This means that decisions are taken on an EU-wide basis only where there is need for matters to be decided at that level; the default is that they are taken at a lower level, whether that be nationally, regionally, locally or by the individual. Few, if any, decisions taken at the EU level are taken at that level because of "some form of model EU citizen".

And as for "sliding into a federal Europe", developments in or additions to the EU's powers and competence require the unanimous consent of all member states, which in some cases (including Ireland) requires approval in a national referendum. This isn't something that can happen by accident, and it isn't something the UK can be compelled into against its will.

Junkyard Tom

Aegir wrote: »

Careful Tom, what I posted is pretty much in line with the shinner’s view on Europe (well, it was but their policies seem to be very flexible when it comes to Europe) thinking differently may sever the connection to the collective.

Whataboutery? Good man. I couldn't give a shit about SF's EU stance, I support EU federalism.

Now, how’s about you doing the decent thing and backing up your statement that it nonsense with telling us all why

You want me to prove your vague tabloid-derived statements wrong? Yeah, good luck with that.

"The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

Alberto Brandolini

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Careful Tom, what I posted is pretty much in line with the shinner’s view on Europe (well, it was but their policies seem to be very flexible when it comes to Europe) thinking differently may sever the connection to the collective.

SF's anti EU rethoric dates back to around the same time as you guys where entering it willing.

Their opinions on it have changed...just as your guys opinions have changed. So apply the 'flexible' slander to all, or none at all.

You supply yet another example, by the way, of you lashing out at something...anything Irish to defend the UK. :rolleyes:

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I love how one man can similtaniously be the most left wing leader labour has ever had and also the biggest nigel farage ally and tory kingmaker in british politics.

He’s not a big fan of the EU, which used to be the default position on the left. Corbyn gets a bad rep, lots of his voters were leave after all and the general consensus post the referendum was that the vote should be accepted.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, the "gives us loads of over paid, self important politicians and public servants gives us loads of over paid, self important politicians and public servants" is just a bog-standard whinge that you can make about any government at any level.

it is, yes. the EU doesn't address this though, it only makes it more significant.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The EU is actually a pretty slender organisation. It employs about 46,000 people across all the EU institutions, which sounds like a lot. But bear in mind that they serve a population of over 500 million, and then contrast that with the 34,000 people employed by Birmingham City Council to serve a population of 1.1 million.

that is a bogus analogy though. If 46,000 civil servants in the EU are serving all 500 million eu citizens, what are our own civil servants doing?

Birmingham city council provide actual front line services, to the people who live in Birmingham, they employ teachers, housing officers, trading standards officers etc. They clean and repair roads, they provide sanitation and water. What do the 45,00 eu civil servants provide?

The 45,000 EU civil servants provide services not to the 500 million eu citizens, but to eu itself.

Why do we have three EU presidents, that all earn more than any other president or prime minister in europe? not only that, they have gold plated pensions and continue to get paid a sliding salary after leaving office. All of which is paid on a vastly reduced "EU" tax rate.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The "try and treat us as all being the same and pass legislation based on some form of model eu citizen" jibe is just nonsense. Completely untrue, and - no offence - pretty ignorant. The principle of subsidiarity is deeply entrenched in the EU legal system - the principle that decisions should be taken at the lowest appropriate level. This means that decisions are taken on an EU-wide basis only where there is need for matters to be decided at that level; the default is that they are taken at a lower level, whether that be nationally, regionally, locally or by the individual. Few, if any, decisions taken at the EU level are taken at that level because of "some form of model EU citizen".

Decisions are taken at an EU wide level for whatever the EU thinks is within its powers. The recent changes to summer time being a good example.

Peregrinus wrote: »

And as for "sliding into a federal Europe", developments in or additions to the EU's powers and competence require the unanimous consent of all member states, which in some cases (including Ireland) requires approval in a national referendum. This isn't something that can happen by accident, and it isn't something the UK can be compelled into against its will.

and the ones that oppose federalism? they become the second tier of europe?

is_that_so

lola85 wrote: »

These ones.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/council-tenants-owe-65m-in-unpaid-rent-437052.html

“Arrears by social housing tenants have doubled in the last eight years, leaving councils owed a staggering €65m in unpaid rent”

Without trying to derail this thread that is down to council ineptitude. Apart from business rates, and they are not great at collecting those, they are notoriously poor at income collection.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

Decisions are taken at an EU wide level for whatever the EU thinks is within its powers. The recent changes to summer time being a good example.

Decisions are taken at an EU level only for what are actually within the EU's powers. The EU's powers are set by the treaties, which are made by the Member States. The EU only has such powers as its member states unanimously agree to confer on it.

By way of illustration, a good example is the fact that there have been no recent changes to summer time. The European Parliament has suggested changes, but it lacks the power to make them. The changes will require the agreement of the member states.

Aegir wrote: »

and the ones that oppose federalism? they become the second tier of europe?

If even one member state declines to agree to a treaty change, the treaty change doesn't happen for any of the member states.

The "second tier of europe" will be those states which withdraw from the process, and so lose the ability to influence or control it, even though it may profoundly affect them. Not looking at anyone in particular.

Professor Moriarty

Aegir wrote: »

it is, yes. the EU doesn't address this though, it only makes it more significant.



that is a bogus analogy though. If 46,000 civil servants in the EU are serving all 500 million eu citizens, what are our own civil servants doing?

Birmingham city council provide actual front line services, to the people who live in Birmingham, they employ teachers, housing officers, trading standards officers etc. They clean and repair roads, they provide sanitation and water. What do the 45,00 eu civil servants provide?

The 45,000 EU civil servants provide services not to the 500 million eu citizens, but to eu itself.

Why do we have three EU presidents, that all earn more than any other president or prime minister in europe? not only that, they have gold plated pensions and continue to get paid a sliding salary after leaving office. All of which is paid on a vastly reduced "EU" tax rate.



Decisions are taken at an EU wide level for whatever the EU thinks is within its powers. The recent changes to summer time being a good example.



and the ones that oppose federalism? they become the second tier of europe?

Annual cost of EU membership per Irish citizen is 50 euros. Best bargain ever.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Annual cost of EU membership per Irish citizen is 50 euros. Best bargain ever.

It costs the Brits a bit more - about 70 euros a skull.

But in both cases the calculations just look at the cost; they ignore the economic return accruing from EU membership.

It was estimated in 2016 by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that UK participation in the single market had raised UK GDP by 4% over what it would otherwise have been. That means an annual benefit to the UK of about EUR 1,440 per capita. Not a bad return for an investment of 70 euros.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

It costs the Brits a bit more - about 70 euros a skull.

But in both cases the calculations just look at the cost; they ignore the economic return accruing from EU membership.

It was estimated in 2016 by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that UK participation in the single market had raised UK GDP by 4% over what it would otherwise have been. That means an annual benefit to the UK of about EUR 1,440 per capita. Not a bad return for an investment of 70 euros.

By the looks of it, if they exit without a deal...all remaining 27 members will get a clear view of just what that 'return accruing to membership' is. Because one former member will be in waters that don't have them. That will be interesting to see.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

It costs the Brits a bit more - about 70 euros a skull.

But in both cases the calculations just look at the cost; they ignore the economic return accruing from EU membership.

It was estimated in 2016 by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that UK participation in the single market had raised UK GDP by 4% over what it would otherwise have been. That means an annual benefit to the UK of about EUR 1,440 per capita. Not a bad return for an investment of 70 euros.

So the EU is a good idea, I think we agree on that.

Imagine how much extra benefit the eu could give, if it wasn't pissing away so much money on gold plated pensions, parachute payments and rather generous schooling allowances for the kids of EU commissioners and presidents.

How many schools, hospitals or other actual needed services could the eu fund every year if it just stopped the almost criminal act of moving parliament to Strasbourg every now and then.

InTheShadows

lola85 wrote: »

These ones.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/council-tenants-owe-65m-in-unpaid-rent-437052.html

“Arrears by social housing tenants have doubled in the last eight years, leaving councils owed a staggering €65m in unpaid rent”

So not free then as people have to pay rent.

Professor Moriarty

Aegir wrote: »

So the EU is a good idea, I think we agree on that.

Imagine how much extra benefit the eu could give, if it wasn't pissing away so much money on gold plated pensions, parachute payments and rather generous schooling allowances for the kids of EU commissioners and presidents.

How many schools, hospitals or other actual needed services could the eu fund every year if it just stopped the almost criminal act of moving parliament to Strasbourg every now and then.

I'm very content with the performances of the EU Commission and Parliament over the past three years. In fact, I'd be happy if Barnier got a bonus.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

So the EU is a good idea, I think we agree on that.

Imagine how much extra benefit the eu could give, if it wasn't pissing away so much money on gold plated pensions, parachute payments and rather generous schooling allowances for the kids of EU commissioners and presidents.

How many schools, hospitals or other actual needed services could the eu fund every year if it just stopped the almost criminal act of moving parliament to Strasbourg every now and then.

Even with all those expenses, it's still just costing a UK citizen 70 euros a month, and returning 1,440 - a net return of 1,370.

If EU membership was totally free the return would (obviously) be 1,440 - an increase of just 5%.

I think you may be attributing more signficance to those costs than they entirely merit, in the scheme of things. And if the UK does wish to derive financnial benefit from trimming politicians' and public servants' expenses, allowances and the like, it will derive far more advantage from doing so domestically - there are vastly, vastly more UK-based politicians and public servants than there are EU ones, and the UK taxpayer bears 100% of the costs involved.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

So the EU is a good idea, I think we agree on that.

Imagine how much extra benefit the eu could give, if it wasn't pissing away so much money on gold plated pensions, parachute payments and rather generous schooling allowances for the kids of EU commissioners and presidents.

How many schools, hospitals or other actual needed services could the eu fund every year if it just stopped the almost criminal act of moving parliament to Strasbourg every now and then.

This is what happens when reform is attempted in the EU.

But the European commission said in a statement that EU rules allow member states to substantially cut CAP “basic payments” to large landowners, such as most of those cited in the Greenpeace report, by applying a ceiling. Nine countries do so, the commission said, including Britain which applies an upper limit in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, where the funds generated are generally spent on rural development projects.


“The UK government chooses not to apply a ceiling in England,” the commission said, adding that repeated proposals for more radical reform – including a compulsory ceiling on basic payments to large landowners – have “consistently been watered down by national ministers”.

Brussels sources said Britain played a leading part in a small group of EU members that opposed the measure. As a result, a major 2014 CAP reform package did not include a compulsory upper limit – but left open an optional ceiling that could be applied at national level.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/29/eu-farming-subsidies-uk-cap-ceiling-england

Brexiteer

seamus wrote: »

The UK has 60 million people and produces enough food for 33 million.

Pretty simple. You won't starve, but thing are about to get lean. Like world-war-rationing, lean. And certain foodstuffs that you take for granted will get really expensive.

I don't know if you've ever tried growing anything, but it takes time. And land. You can't double your output in the space of year, or even five.

the UK also EXPORTS £22 billion worth of food & drink. besides, as i said, we can get food from anywhere. world-war-rationing, ridiculous. we already have trade deals with 38 countries and lots more to come

declanflynn wrote: »

You should go for a hard brexit it in the morning mate, don't be afraid, it won't even take 3 months for sterling to bounce back I'd say 3 days and the ould pound will be stronger than ever

stop mis-representing what i said, "mate"

declanflynn wrote: »

Its going to super duper for ye mate best of luck

its not, but it will

First Up wrote: »

Under a different name I assume as you only started using this one today.

Looks familiar though.......

no, as i said i was only a reader, accidentally due to the fact that a friend is a regular poster who shows me the brexit threads on the site

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Bullies don’t like being bullied.

What the average brexiter doesn’t realized they are being bullied and manipulated by their elite classes like Mogg and Johnson et al.

if you feel the need to discreit us based on events 100 years ago and more, it says it all. as for the elite, the government, the baks, the city of london, top business people were all over the remain campaigin in 2015/16. so think again!

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The elite among remainders at last the move vocal mouths aren’t making millions betting against the uk economy and shifting their money abroad etc

The leave ones are doing that and worse

any evidence of who is moving their money abroad and how much?

MrMusician18

seamus wrote: »

The UK has 60 million people and produces enough food for 33 million.

Pretty simple. You won't starve, but thing are about to get lean. Like world-war-rationing, lean. And certain foodstuffs that you take for granted will get really expensive.

I don't know if you've ever tried growing anything, but it takes time. And land. You can't double your output in the space of year, or even five.

Hyperbole is no good for anyone, it ruins the debate and makes you look silly.
Ration books will not be coming back to the UK. What the UK is likely to see if a lack of fresh imported produce on it's shelves - no strawberries in December.

gmisk

Brexiteer wrote: »

any evidence of who is moving their money abroad and how much?

Jacob Rees Mogg.....is he not in anyway involved in brexit?...nothing to see here...
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/rees-mogg-declares-himself-fan-of-irish-investment-regime-1.3822113
https://www.channel4.com/press/news/brexiteer-jacob-rees-mogg-estimated-have-earnt-ps7m-investments-referendum-according

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/richest-in-britain-got-25bn-richer-since-the-brexit-vote-923461.html
Richest in Britain got 25BN richer since Brexit vote
- Their combined net worth is £83.6bn. Two Brexiteers are responsible for most of the gains.

Jim Ratcliffe and James Dyson, the founder of Dyson Ltd, have added a combined £15bn since the vote, according to the ranking, with Mr Ratcliffe displacing Hugh Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster, as Britain’s richest person.


Thats the same James Dyson who shifted Dysons HQ to singapore from the Uk.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/manufacturing/brexit-backer-james-dyson-shifts-company-hq-to-singapore-1.3766934

careless sherpa

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Hyperbole is no good for anyone, it ruins the debate and makes you look silly.
Ration books will not be coming back to the UK. What the UK is likely to see if a lack of fresh imported produce on it's shelves - no strawberries in December.

What Britain is likely to see is a substantial increase in prices on the shelves. We will probably see similar. Some due to increase costs of getting the produce there and some attributable to gouging

Brexiteer

gmisk wrote: »

Jacob Rees Mogg.....is he not in anyway involved in brexit?...nothing to see here...

To use the words of the man himself, "im afraid this chap doesnt know what he is talking about"

Search for "Jeremy Corbyn Attacks Jacob over his Investment Fund (Again)" on youtube. it wont let me post links. it shows the response to this by rees mogg himself

it is hilarious that any normal profits made by any brexiteer in the last 3 years is now seen as fishy by the desperate!

RobMc59

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

As McWilliams rightly points it’s out a country that has no education in its schools whatsoever outside what we did in WWII and how we used to rule the world and no awareness or education of how that is absolutely not the case anymore. They weren’t aware of their delusions of empire going into th EU, and they don’t understand their empire delusion is just that upon leaving and they won’t. Potentially for decades.

Look them to Germany and it relentlessly still schools its kids about what they did and their history and how it never can be allowed happen again and setting up a constitution that enables any future German government going that way be challenged in the court by citizens


The Brits are in colonial hangover and the headache hasn’t even kicked in. They’ve not even woken up yet. The puking is yet to come.

The British version of history is compatible with the history of most world powers,the importance of Russian sacrifice is acknowledged for example by Britain although I'm not sure the US acknowledges their importance.
Its actually Ireland and Irish people who have a unique view of world history,especially 20th century history in which minor events are important on the world stage which isn't the case.I realise this opinion will be unpopular but it's how things are viewed outside Ireland.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Even with all those expenses, it's still just costing a UK citizen 70 euros a month, and returning 1,440 - a net return of 1,370.

If EU membership was totally free the return would (obviously) be 1,440 - an increase of just 5%.

aah, ok. so because the return is so small, we should close our eyes to politicians and civil servants pissing away millions in their own self interest?

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you may be attributing more signficance to those costs than they entirely merit, in the scheme of things. And if the UK does wish to derive financnial benefit from trimming politicians' and public servants' expenses, allowances and the like, it will derive far more advantage from doing so domestically

so what you are saying is that we should turn a blind eye if Leo decides to give himself a €500k pay rise, because in the grand scheme of things, it makes very little difference to the total state budget?

Peregrinus wrote: »

- there are vastly, vastly more UK-based politicians and public servants than there are EU ones, and the UK taxpayer bears 100% of the costs involved.

as I said earlier, it is a bogus analogy. The UK is a state and therefore provides direct services to its citizens. It has a police force, a military, it has border control, education, welfare, income tax to collect etc.

The EU is not a state, it does not provide direct services to its citizens, because it has none. Zero, zilch. All is actually has is the 45,000 or so people that work for it. 45,000 people who need three Presidents (all on over €300k per year, plus substantial living allowances and parachute salaries when they leave the role) to look after them.

It is civil service on steroids.

Peregrinus

Brexiteer wrote: »

To use the words of the man himself, "im afraid this chap doesnt know what he is talking about"

Search for "Jeremy Corbyn Attacks Jacob over his Investment Fund (Again)" on youtube. it wont let me post links. it shows the response to this by rees mogg himself

it is hilarious that any normal profits made by any brexiteer in the last 3 years is now seen as fishy by the desperate!

But as we know from yesterday, Rees-Mogg is a bare-faced liar. So his rebuttal of criticisms is, um, not to be taken as gospel.

I'm not saying he is moving his money abroad. My guess would be that much of it has always been abroad. All I'm saying is that his own statements about what he is doing and why are not particularly compelling.

Stop moaning ffs

RobMc59 wrote: »

The British version of history is compatible with the history of most world powers,the importance of Russian sacrifice is acknowledged for example by Britain although I'm not sure the US acknowledges their importance.
Its actually Ireland and Irish people who have a unique view of world history,especially 20th century history in which minor events are important on the world stage which isn't the case.I realise this opinion will be unpopular but it's how things are viewed outside Ireland.

‘The British version of history.’ Got it in one rob.

My point was the whole history isn’t taught to British people at any points.

WWI WWII World Cup 66

Ends.


That all. That’s all there is. If you doubt that at all just look over there *gesticulates wildly at brexit Britain*


Rob here’s that podcast for full context. Give it a go

Love to hear your toughts It only 29 mins

https://podcasts.apple.com/ie/podcast/the-david-mcwilliams-podcast/id1462649946