I think you are making the same point as I am. That forecasts are of necessiity a snapshot based on the past and that it is what we do that matters.
You really are an odd one.
You are the CEO of Unilever, which makes among other things, Flora pro-activ. Which reduces chloresterol levels.
You have in front of you a sign off document for a new factory to be built to make Flora pro-activ. Of necessity (because factories like this are not flat-pack jobs from IKEA) , when the plan was first put together, it was based on sales forecasts developed two years ago.
In those two years, the weight of medical opinion on the whole issue of animal fats and chloresterol, and effect on health has shifted. (because as you say, stuff happens) Do you:
1) Call for updated sales forecasts and resulting ROI implications for the factory, before signing off on £200 million. plus a commitment to hundreds of new workers
2. Say 'nothing ventured nothing gained" and sign off right there?
Can it in the basis of changed facts, not forecasts of what medical opinion may be in the future.
Every single day that passes more and more evidence is amassed from every possible source both domestic and overseas that the U.K. is heading for the rocks, yet still the response to the serious issues posed is pathetic.
Depends where you source your information and who you believe. Nobody here heard of Stephanie Flanders till her name was posted here yesterday, yes most of you googled her name and now know all about her. You may kid each other but you don't kid me. The response is pathetic you are right,. That's why its now 80 pages and still going zzzzzzzz.
The eurozone’s “booming” economy powered ahead in November with jobs growth and new manufacturing orders reaching 17-year highs as a stronger currency did little to dampen robust foreign demand for the region’s exports.
According to the eurozone purchasing managers’ index, compiled by IHS Markit, the region’s businesses enjoyed their best monthly performance in six and half years. All main indicators of output, demand, employment and inflation were at multiyear highs, pointing to an economy now firing on all cylinders.
The data, released on Thursday, reinforced the view that the strength of the eurozone economy would continue into new year. The PMI surveys are viewed as reliable indicators of economic growth and the latest data point to a further pick-up in GDP growth after a strong third quarter. UniCredit said the latest figures suggested growth at an annualised 3 per cent in the fourth quarter.
Chris Williamson, IHS Markit chief business economist, said: “The message from the latest eurozone PMI is clear: business is booming.”
I am glad that the eurozone economies are doing well and I am sure you are equally glad we have more people in work than ever before.
I would like to be glad, because I have seen what long-term unemployment can do to good ordinary people. That is why I hated Thatcher. Unfortunately it seems that many of these jobs are of extremely dubious contractual provenance.
Every single day that passes more and more evidence is amassed from every possible source both domestic and overseas that the U.K. is heading for the rocks, yet still the response to the serious issues posed is pathetic.
Depends where you source your information and who you believe. Nobody here heard of Stephanie Flanders till her name was posted here yesterday, yes most of you googled her name and now know all about her. You may kid each other but you don't kid me. The response is pathetic you are right,. That's why its now 80 pages and still going zzzzzzzz.
Whether anyone had heard of her or not is irrelevant, you can't really argue with the point made
Stephanie flanders was on the BBC news for ages. And no I didn't Google it.
Not only was she on BBC news, she was their Economics Correspondant, so it was her job to understand this stuff, and explain it in an accessible way to the public. Perhaps if Chippy had paid attention he'd have learnt something useful rather than revelling in his ignorance.
Every single day that passes more and more evidence is amassed from every possible source both domestic and overseas that the U.K. is heading for the rocks, yet still the response to the serious issues posed is pathetic.
Depends where you source your information and who you believe. Nobody here heard of Stephanie Flanders till her name was posted here yesterday, yes most of you googled her name and now know all about her. You may kid each other but you don't kid me. The response is pathetic you are right,. That's why its now 80 pages and still going zzzzzzzz.
I doubt anyone other than you needed to Google who Stephanie Flanders is. And you refuse to inform yourself for completely insane reasons. Instead you just listen to the hard-right Daily Mail reject pundits on LBC and regurgitate their opinions on here. That's even more pathetic than using a search engine.
Every single day that passes more and more evidence is amassed from every possible source both domestic and overseas that the U.K. is heading for the rocks, yet still the response to the serious issues posed is pathetic.
Depends where you source your information and who you believe. Nobody here heard of Stephanie Flanders till her name was posted here yesterday, yes most of you googled her name and now know all about her. You may kid each other but you don't kid me. The response is pathetic you are right,. That's why its now 80 pages and still going zzzzzzzz.
Whose she.... Its funny as on lbc last week a professor of economics said quite the opposite.
Also on Ian dale show last week when talking to an irish minister currently working in their prime ministers government, agreed that ireland exported 50% of its agriculture to the uk.. And 60-70% of its other goods. This came about as their jumped up litle pm was going to veto against us in the up and coming meetings.
Then comes on this Doctor of irish EU economics and said they export 13% to the uk for agricultural and more to the USA...
The formers figures were backed up by the independent prior to the brexit vote, who got rheir figures from errr the irish government.
The figure for 60-70% of Irish exported goods going to the UK would, I might suggest, include goods in transit. While the impact on the Irish economy is more significant for agricultural products, especially beef and milk, the UK is nowhere near as important to the Irish economy as it once was (a far greater proportion of Irish business relies on the rest of the EU).
Jumped up or otherwise, the Taoiseach is doing his best to represent Irish interests, even if that means voting against entering into future relationship discussions. He seems, at the moment, to be doing a better job of gaining necessary support from the EU than his counterpart.
I dont really care about % s on either side of the camp.. Or twitter comments by pratts who dont matter and who have not got the foggiest. My point we can sit all day and post ridicculous links by people no-ones heard off to back their narrow view... By the way where is link man, is he on holiday.
If you're referring to Stephanie Flanders as being a pratt no one's heard of who hasn't got a clue you really aren't doing yourself any favours. But I expect you've Googled her for yourself by now.
I do not google anything... I do not need too... Sadly most of the people here do.
Whose she.... Its funny as on lbc last week a professor of economics said quite the opposite.
Also on Ian dale show last week when talking to an irish minister currently working in their prime ministers government, agreed that ireland exported 50% of its agriculture to the uk.. And 60-70% of its other goods. This came about as their jumped up litle pm was going to veto against us in the up and coming meetings.
Then comes on this Doctor of irish EU economics and said they export 13% to the uk for agricultural and more to the USA...
The formers figures were backed up by the independent prior to the brexit vote, who got rheir figures from errr the irish government.
The figure for 60-70% of Irish exported goods going to the UK would, I might suggest, include goods in transit. While the impact on the Irish economy is more significant for agricultural products, especially beef and milk, the UK is nowhere near as important to the Irish economy as it once was (a far greater proportion of Irish business relies on the rest of the EU).
Jumped up or otherwise, the Taoiseach is doing his best to represent Irish interests, even if that means voting against entering into future relationship discussions. He seems, at the moment, to be doing a better job of gaining necessary support from the EU than his counterpart.
I dont really care about % s on either side of the camp.. Or twitter comments by pratts who dont matter and who have not got the foggiest. My point we can sit all day and post ridicculous links by people no-ones heard off to back their narrow view... By the way where is link man, is he on holiday.
If you're referring to Stephanie Flanders as being a pratt no one's heard of who hasn't got a clue you really aren't doing yourself any favours. But I expect you've Googled her for yourself by now.
I do not google anything... I do not need too... Sadly most of the people here do.
Folks, does anybody believe that any amount of facts or evidence is going to be accepted by people set in their ways?
Last week there was a conference of the Flat Earth Society and there was an interview with a lady who simply believed the Earth was flat, and any scientific reasoning wouldn't wash with her (and others). We are apparently living in some kind of gigantic snow dome with walls around the edges to stop us falling off. Cameras that take pictures of the earth from space are wrong, and anyway the space missions are a diversion and a con...and so on and so on. They believe it because they simply want to, but at the moment they are losers in the debate about the shape of the planet.
There really seems to be no reason for any of us to brings facts, research, evidence or whatever into things. People aren't going to change their minds.
However, that still leaves us with winners and losers.
Brexit won, so now they have to be able to implement it, and demonstrate a plan to deal with all the ins and outs of it. This is where they will succeed or much more likely fail, they don't know how to deal with all the ins and outs, and when questioned the answer is wait and see, lets hope for the best.
It has been said from the beginning of all this to the brexiters 'you won, get on with it', but they can't get on with it because it is too difficult for them. Quoting this or that expert or fact is pointless, point out the phenomenology instead.
Outside the Eurozone, but inside the Single Market...Romania showed annualised GDP growth in the 3rd quarter of 8.8% !!
And if you think that's a fluke I can tell you that it's booming right here in Cesko too, 3rd qtr growth at 5% outpacing all analysts forecasts. National unemployment is 2.9%, which means in effect there is a labour shortage. Every other shop window in Prague has a notice seeking checkout people, cooks, waiters. My biz ought to be booming too, but it isn't because there simply are not any people to hire.
And these two countries cast an interesting light on the immigration debate. At that growth rate, Romania needs labour, urgently. Where will it find it? Why, from the Romanian diaspora of course, mainly the ones in the UK. The stupid thing is, this is how it was always meant to be with these countries. EU funds would lift them but in the short term many would try their luck abroad; but they would eventually return to more stable prosperous countries. You didn't need any Brexit for that process to happen, you gormless mugs!
The Czech Republic has a bigger problem. Where will it get the labour from? Hardly any Czechs left in the first place. No Bulgarians or Romanians see anything here for them. Anyway, hardly any migrants from anywhere speak Czech. This the other UK tragedy. When it needs labour it can suck in migrants from wherever as many have English as a second language. But the ones most likely to assimilate are surely those from our nearest neighbours. We have told them we don't want them anymore. So who is going to fill the vacancies, with UK unemployment also below the key 5% level that provides labour liquidity?
Firstly please don't call me a gormless mug. I have not shown that disrespect to you.
Secondly I am very pleased if the Uk has helped Romanians to prosper and then return home to nurture further their own country of birth. The recent ons stats showed an increase of Romanians and Bulgarians employed in the uk since the referendum and I believe a corresponding reduction in Czechs and poles. Overall there was a net increase of 110,000. I suspect with the economies of Europe at various stages in GDP growth there may well be net outflow in the coming years. Maybe not as people from all over the world like it here for various reasons. In addition there has been in my opinion an inbalance of movement within the eu28 and as you point out that simple fact may be the familiar use of the English language.
My issue is and always has been how this is managed cohesively? We build gp surgeries roads schools etc and then there is an exodus because of say sweet corn famine or exchange rates etc. The volumes of people moving around Europe in this way is both exciting and challenging.
I would have preferred an open and frank discussion between Cameron and the Eu on this. It didn't happen and we are were we are and of course Cameron Osborne and his cronies are nowhere to be seen!!
My hope with brexit is that our future uk politicians will not have the Eu as a scapegoat for excuses. They will need to stand up and be accountable for success and failure and we as the electorate will have our part to play in future progress.
The eurozone’s “booming” economy powered ahead in November with jobs growth and new manufacturing orders reaching 17-year highs as a stronger currency did little to dampen robust foreign demand for the region’s exports.
According to the eurozone purchasing managers’ index, compiled by IHS Markit, the region’s businesses enjoyed their best monthly performance in six and half years. All main indicators of output, demand, employment and inflation were at multiyear highs, pointing to an economy now firing on all cylinders.
The data, released on Thursday, reinforced the view that the strength of the eurozone economy would continue into new year. The PMI surveys are viewed as reliable indicators of economic growth and the latest data point to a further pick-up in GDP growth after a strong third quarter. UniCredit said the latest figures suggested growth at an annualised 3 per cent in the fourth quarter.
Chris Williamson, IHS Markit chief business economist, said: “The message from the latest eurozone PMI is clear: business is booming.”
I am glad that the eurozone economies are doing well and I am sure you are equally glad we have more people in work than ever before.
A very abstract concept these days!
Through no fault of their own many people working in the UK produce and earn less than they consume. It's stretching it a bit to say they are "in work".
Have we got to the point where, as a country, we have people that are in work but others don't/wont accept that as those people consume more than they earn?
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
To be clear, the 'gormless mugs" I referred to are those Brexiteers whose main premise for Brexit is to stem the "tide" of "migrants" from EU countries. They are gormless mugs because they totally failed to understand the economic and social motivations behind the arrival of those people. They failed to understand the basic principles behind the combination of free movement of labour and support for the newer poorer accession countries aimed at raising them to the economic and social standards of stronger EU countries.
I did not consider whether you personally fall or fell into that category before writing that. You have clarified your concern as the following:
My issue is and always has been how this is managed cohesively? We build gp surgeries roads schools etc and then there is an exodus because of say sweet corn famine or exchange rates etc. The volumes of people moving around Europe in this way is both exciting and challenging.
To some extent I agree with you; strong inward migration brings pressure on infrastructure, and that is a serious challenge. It definitely needs to be managed properly by UK politicians, as does the economic unbalance of London and the SE vs the rest of the country. I do not agree at all that it is the key reason to leave the EU since it totally ignores the benefits of such migration - as the imminent return home of many Romanians will doubtless illustrate in the year ahead.
If you wish to criticise me for being unfairly critical of Brexiteers (not you personally in particular) because my life in Central Europe gives me an insight into these particular migrants, I would acknowledge that, but would point out that (e.g) the Germans or Dutch or Swedish that I know share my beliefs about the nature of the migration above, and that is because they understand the true nature of the European Project. That very phrase seems to strike fear into otherwise highly intellligent Brexiteers, (and I certainly think of some on here in that category).
Have we got to the point where, as a country, we have people that are in work but others don't/wont accept that as those people consume more than they earn?
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
This thread is getting barmier by the day.
Sorry - I didn't mean to be barmy!
I was just trying to make the point that a simple government statistic like people "in work" can be very misleading.
Some people "in work" will be doing reasonably rewarding and useful jobs while others may find themselves struggling with jobs which are poorly paid and not particularly productive.
I suggest there is a problem if the headline figure is "95% employment" but most of the work actually falls into the latter category.
I genuinely wasn't trying to imply that people should offset their contribution and consumption etc. I don't really know whether I'm a net contributor or not. Like everybody else I try to do my best!
But if my job didn't seem to be contributing much to society and / or was poorly paid, I would hope to be able to find something better and might expect government policy to help me.
I certainly don't condemn anyone in this situation or believe they should stop working. But the government can't just say these people are "in work" so everything is OK.
Have we got to the point where, as a country, we have people that are in work but others don't/wont accept that as those people consume more than they earn?
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
This thread is getting barmier by the day.
Sorry - I didn't mean to be barmy!
I was just trying to make the point that a simple government statistic like people "in work" can be very misleading.
Some people "in work" will be doing reasonably rewarding and useful jobs while others may find themselves struggling with jobs which are poorly paid and not particularly productive.
I suggest there is a problem if the headline figure is "95% employment" but most of the work actually falls into the latter category.
I genuinely wasn't trying to imply that people should offset their contribution and consumption etc. I don't really know whether I'm a net contributor or not. Like everybody else I try to do my best!
But if my job didn't seem to be contributing much to society and / or was poorly paid, I would hope to be able to find something better and might expect government policy to help me.
I certainly don't condemn anyone in this situation or believe they should stop working. But the government can't just say these people are "in work" so everything is OK.
I think most sound bites are misleading in one way or another. All governments will use whatever statistics they can to paint a brighter future than the one some see.
I wasn't attempting to dig you out either, so please don't think that I was. That was/is not my intention.
With regards to having a job that contributes to society, I'd hazard a guess that most jobs don't benefit society. By that I mean in a positive manner.
Anyway, two positives from today are that Carl Pistorius' half brother has rightfully had his sentence doubled and Zimbabwe can, hopefully, look towards a brighter future.
Sometimes news from abroad (outside the UK/EU bubble) makes you realise that the problems you face as a country are quite trivial in the grand scheme of things.
Outside the Eurozone, but inside the Single Market...Romania showed annualised GDP growth in the 3rd quarter of 8.8% !!
And if you think that's a fluke I can tell you that it's booming right here in Cesko too, 3rd qtr growth at 5% outpacing all analysts forecasts. National unemployment is 2.9%, which means in effect there is a labour shortage. Every other shop window in Prague has a notice seeking checkout people, cooks, waiters. My biz ought to be booming too, but it isn't because there simply are not any people to hire.
And these two countries cast an interesting light on the immigration debate. At that growth rate, Romania needs labour, urgently. Where will it find it? Why, from the Romanian diaspora of course, mainly the ones in the UK. The stupid thing is, this is how it was always meant to be with these countries. EU funds would lift them but in the short term many would try their luck abroad; but they would eventually return to more stable prosperous countries. You didn't need any Brexit for that process to happen, you gormless mugs!
The Czech Republic has a bigger problem. Where will it get the labour from? Hardly any Czechs left in the first place. No Bulgarians or Romanians see anything here for them. Anyway, hardly any migrants from anywhere speak Czech. This the other UK tragedy. When it needs labour it can suck in migrants from wherever as many have English as a second language. But the ones most likely to assimilate are surely those from our nearest neighbours. We have told them we don't want them anymore. So who is going to fill the vacancies, with UK unemployment also below the key 5% level that provides labour liquidity?
Firstly please don't call me a gormless mug. I have not shown that disrespect to you.
Secondly I am very pleased if the Uk has helped Romanians to prosper and then return home to nurture further their own country of birth. The recent ons stats showed an increase of Romanians and Bulgarians employed in the uk since the referendum and I believe a corresponding reduction in Czechs and poles. Overall there was a net increase of 110,000. I suspect with the economies of Europe at various stages in GDP growth there may well be net outflow in the coming years. Maybe not as people from all over the world like it here for various reasons. In addition there has been in my opinion an inbalance of movement within the eu28 and as you point out that simple fact may be the familiar use of the English language.
My issue is and always has been how this is managed cohesively? We build gp surgeries roads schools etc and then there is an exodus because of say sweet corn famine or exchange rates etc. The volumes of people moving around Europe in this way is both exciting and challenging.
I would have preferred an open and frank discussion between Cameron and the Eu on this. It didn't happen and we are were we are and of course Cameron Osborne and his cronies are nowhere to be seen!!
My hope with brexit is that our future uk politicians will not have the Eu as a scapegoat for excuses. They will need to stand up and be accountable for success and failure and we as the electorate will have our part to play in future progress.
I understand your underlying point about managing resources, infrastructure, etc. properly and this may be challenging in light of immigration.
I just wanted to congratulate you on coming up with a reason for Leaving that I've never seen before i.e. we need to Leave the EU because we might end up building too many roads, schools, hospitals, etc. if they all go back to their country of birth. What a truly dreadful thing it would be to have too many doctors in the country for example...
Have we got to the point where, as a country, we have people that are in work but others don't/wont accept that as those people consume more than they earn?
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
This thread is getting barmier by the day.
Sorry - I didn't mean to be barmy!
I was just trying to make the point that a simple government statistic like people "in work" can be very misleading.
Some people "in work" will be doing reasonably rewarding and useful jobs while others may find themselves struggling with jobs which are poorly paid and not particularly productive.
I suggest there is a problem if the headline figure is "95% employment" but most of the work actually falls into the latter category.
I genuinely wasn't trying to imply that people should offset their contribution and consumption etc. I don't really know whether I'm a net contributor or not. Like everybody else I try to do my best!
But if my job didn't seem to be contributing much to society and / or was poorly paid, I would hope to be able to find something better and might expect government policy to help me.
I certainly don't condemn anyone in this situation or believe they should stop working. But the government can't just say these people are "in work" so everything is OK.
I think most sound bites are misleading in one way or another. All governments will use whatever statistics they can to paint a brighter future than the one some see.
I wasn't attempting to dig you out either, so please don't think that I was. That was/is not my intention.
With regards to having a job that contributes to society, I'd hazard a guess that most jobs don't benefit society. By that I mean in a positive manner.
Anyway, two positives from today are that Carl Pistorius' half brother has rightfully had his sentence doubled and Zimbabwe can, hopefully, look towards a brighter future.
Sometimes news from abroad (outside the UK/EU bubble) makes you realise that the problems you face as a country are quite trivial in the grand scheme of things.
Agreed. When I put up on the general things that annoy you thread about how my brand new white work shirt has already got a massive pink stain from running colours, it then became apparent that @MrLargo has suffered from worn elbows and we both buy Charles Tyhwritt shirts
The magnitude of which shouldn’t be forgotten in amongst all this brexit nonsense
Have we got to the point where, as a country, we have people that are in work but others don't/wont accept that as those people consume more than they earn?
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
This thread is getting barmier by the day.
Sorry - I didn't mean to be barmy!
I was just trying to make the point that a simple government statistic like people "in work" can be very misleading.
Some people "in work" will be doing reasonably rewarding and useful jobs while others may find themselves struggling with jobs which are poorly paid and not particularly productive.
I suggest there is a problem if the headline figure is "95% employment" but most of the work actually falls into the latter category.
I genuinely wasn't trying to imply that people should offset their contribution and consumption etc. I don't really know whether I'm a net contributor or not. Like everybody else I try to do my best!
But if my job didn't seem to be contributing much to society and / or was poorly paid, I would hope to be able to find something better and might expect government policy to help me.
I certainly don't condemn anyone in this situation or believe they should stop working. But the government can't just say these people are "in work" so everything is OK.
I think most sound bites are misleading in one way or another. All governments will use whatever statistics they can to paint a brighter future than the one some see.
I wasn't attempting to dig you out either, so please don't think that I was. That was/is not my intention.
With regards to having a job that contributes to society, I'd hazard a guess that most jobs don't benefit society. By that I mean in a positive manner.
Anyway, two positives from today are that Carl Pistorius' half brother has rightfully had his sentence doubled and Zimbabwe can, hopefully, look towards a brighter future.
Sometimes news from abroad (outside the UK/EU bubble) makes you realise that the problems you face as a country are quite trivial in the grand scheme of things.
Agreed. When I put up on the general things that annoy you thread about how my brand new white work shirt has already got a massive pink stain from running colours, it then became apparent that @MrLargo has suffered from worn elbows and we both buy Charles Tyhwritt shirts
The magnitude of which shouldn’t be forgotten in amongst all this brexit nonsense
You see, it's these sorts of issues that get lost in amongst the cacophony of granular problems that people highlight in this thread.
I'd like to see more people speak up about their attire problems and, maybe, we'll see less Brexit speak.
@NornIrishAddick"Collectively, also, they will not wish to undermine their external borders." Thought control of borders was anathema to Remainers. The EU is however happy to undermine the internal border between the Republic and the UK as a tactic to block discussion on trade.
The implication is that if the border question is not solved to the satisfaction of the EU (Ireland firmly tying it's banner to the EU, impotent to hold an independent and overriding view on what is "sufficient progress") there will be no deal on trade, and as far as the border question is concerned the EU washes its hands of the problem and leaves Ireland and the UK to its own devices. Ireland would be between a rock and a hard place. Ireland will have to choose between - a workable solution that's in conflict with the EU's rules on customs controls - or the peace and security of the island of Ireland. The UK does not have a problem with an open border on the Island and flexible customs controls, only Remainers suggest the Brexit vote means a hard border is inevitable.
The problem is therefore not one of finding a solution that suits Ireland and the UK, it's one that does not undermine the protectionist customs regulations of the EU. The shrill noises from the Irish premier about the lack of progress disguise the real issue, the prospect of him having to make a choice between the EU and the peace of the Island.
Maintaining the peace of Europe is the cornerstone of EU ideology we are told - except it can be put in jeopardy and used as a bargaining chip if there is a challenge to the political ambition of the EU institution.
Brexit may have precipitated a problem, the EU's ambitions are the barrier to a solution.
@NornIrishAddick"Collectively, also, they will not wish to undermine their external borders." Thought control of borders was anathema to Remainers. The EU is however happy to undermine the internal border between the Republic and the UK as a tactic to block discussion on trade.
The implication is that if the border question is not solved to the satisfaction of the EU (Ireland firmly tying it's banner to the EU, impotent to hold an independent and overriding view on what is "sufficient progress") there will be no deal on trade, and as far as the border question is concerned the EU washes its hands of the problem and leaves Ireland and the UK to its own devices. Ireland would be between a rock and a hard place. Ireland will have to choose between - a workable solution that's in conflict with the EU's rules on customs controls - or the peace and security of the island of Ireland. The UK does not have a problem with an open border on the Island and flexible customs controls, only Remainers suggest the Brexit vote means a hard border is inevitable.
The problem is therefore not one of finding a solution that suits Ireland and the UK, it's one that does not undermine the protectionist customs regulations of the EU. The shrill noises from the Irish premier about the lack of progress disguise the real issue, the prospect of him having to make a choice between the EU and the peace of the Island.
Maintaining the peace of Europe is the cornerstone of EU ideology we are told - except it can be put in jeopardy and used as a bargaining chip if there is a challenge to the political ambition of the EU institution.
Brexit may have precipitated a problem, the EU's ambitions are the barrier to a solution.
How the hell is it an internal border? At the moment it is as both the UK and ROI are in the EU and there is a common travel area between the two. But come Brexit the ROI, an independent country and member of the EU, will have a land border with another independent country that is not a member of the EU - by any measure that is an External border.
B-b-b-b-but what about taking back control? And all that other stuff Farage and the Mail bang on about (even though they and others claimed we would remain in the common travel area post Brexit).
B-b-b-b-but what about taking back control? And all that other stuff Farage and the Mail bang on about (even though they and others claimed we would remain in the common travel area post Brexit).
@NornIrishAddick"Collectively, also, they will not wish to undermine their external borders." Thought control of borders was anathema to Remainers. The EU is however happy to undermine the internal border between the Republic and the UK as a tactic to block discussion on trade.
The implication is that if the border question is not solved to the satisfaction of the EU (Ireland firmly tying it's banner to the EU, impotent to hold an independent and overriding view on what is "sufficient progress") there will be no deal on trade, and as far as the border question is concerned the EU washes its hands of the problem and leaves Ireland and the UK to its own devices. Ireland would be between a rock and a hard place. Ireland will have to choose between - a workable solution that's in conflict with the EU's rules on customs controls - or the peace and security of the island of Ireland. The UK does not have a problem with an open border on the Island and flexible customs controls, only Remainers suggest the Brexit vote means a hard border is inevitable.
The problem is therefore not one of finding a solution that suits Ireland and the UK, it's one that does not undermine the protectionist customs regulations of the EU. The shrill noises from the Irish premier about the lack of progress disguise the real issue, the prospect of him having to make a choice between the EU and the peace of the Island.
Maintaining the peace of Europe is the cornerstone of EU ideology we are told - except it can be put in jeopardy and used as a bargaining chip if there is a challenge to the political ambition of the EU institution.
Brexit may have precipitated a problem, the EU's ambitions are the barrier to a solution.
Isn't this just more of the same old narrative that the EU is a malignant force bullying it's members into accepting situations they don't agree with and preparing the ground to blame them...and absolve ourselves...when no agreement is possible because of a situation we created?
We are choosing to leave, against both the will of the EU itself and half our country. We also accepted the timescale for this and agreed the conditions as to the way the negotiations would be handled. We knew the border situation would be a major stumbling block, even before the Tory party got us into hock to the dinosaur deniers, yet went ahead anyway. We decided to refuse to contemplate retaining any sort of associate membership of the EU which may have solved many of the issues identified (even though this was presented as a perfectly acceptable, sensible option by leading Brexit proponents for many years before the vote).
Comments
Whether anyone had heard of her or not is irrelevant, you can't really argue with the point made
And you’re still here.
Last week there was a conference of the Flat Earth Society and there was an interview with a lady who simply believed the Earth was flat, and any scientific reasoning wouldn't wash with her (and others). We are apparently living in some kind of gigantic snow dome with walls around the edges to stop us falling off. Cameras that take pictures of the earth from space are wrong, and anyway the space missions are a diversion and a con...and so on and so on. They believe it because they simply want to, but at the moment they are losers in the debate about the shape of the planet.
There really seems to be no reason for any of us to brings facts, research, evidence or whatever into things. People aren't going to change their minds.
However, that still leaves us with winners and losers.
Brexit won, so now they have to be able to implement it, and demonstrate a plan to deal with all the ins and outs of it. This is where they will succeed or much more likely fail, they don't know how to deal with all the ins and outs, and when questioned the answer is wait and see, lets hope for the best.
It has been said from the beginning of all this to the brexiters 'you won, get on with it', but they can't get on with it because it is too difficult for them. Quoting this or that expert or fact is pointless, point out the phenomenology instead.
Secondly I am very pleased if the Uk has helped Romanians to prosper and then return home to nurture further their own country of birth. The recent ons stats showed an increase of Romanians and Bulgarians employed in the uk since the referendum and I believe a corresponding reduction in Czechs and poles. Overall there was a net increase of 110,000. I suspect with the economies of Europe at various stages in GDP growth there may well be net outflow in the coming years. Maybe not as people from all over the world like it here for various reasons. In addition there has been in my opinion an inbalance of movement within the eu28 and as you point out that simple fact may be the familiar use of the English language.
My issue is and always has been how this is managed cohesively? We build gp surgeries roads schools etc and then there is an exodus because of say sweet corn famine or exchange rates etc. The volumes of people moving around Europe in this way is both exciting and challenging.
I would have preferred an open and frank discussion between Cameron and the Eu on this. It didn't happen and we are were we are and of course Cameron Osborne and his cronies are nowhere to be seen!!
My hope with brexit is that our future uk politicians will not have the Eu as a scapegoat for excuses. They will need to stand up and be accountable for success and failure and we as the electorate will have our part to play in future progress.
Through no fault of their own many people working in the UK produce and earn less than they consume. It's stretching it a bit to say they are "in work".
Hasn't that been the case since the dawn of time?
Humans are a wasteful species and if you believe you're a net contributor to the grand earth scheme then you're very much mistaken.
Therefore we actually have a planet where nobody works, because work is now being determined by offsetting your net contribution against your overall consumption.
This thread is getting barmier by the day.
To be clear, the 'gormless mugs" I referred to are those Brexiteers whose main premise for Brexit is to stem the "tide" of "migrants" from EU countries. They are gormless mugs because they totally failed to understand the economic and social motivations behind the arrival of those people. They failed to understand the basic principles behind the combination of free movement of labour and support for the newer poorer accession countries aimed at raising them to the economic and social standards of stronger EU countries.
I did not consider whether you personally fall or fell into that category before writing that. You have clarified your concern as the following:
My issue is and always has been how this is managed cohesively? We build gp surgeries roads schools etc and then there is an exodus because of say sweet corn famine or exchange rates etc. The volumes of people moving around Europe in this way is both exciting and challenging.
To some extent I agree with you; strong inward migration brings pressure on infrastructure, and that is a serious challenge. It definitely needs to be managed properly by UK politicians, as does the economic unbalance of London and the SE vs the rest of the country. I do not agree at all that it is the key reason to leave the EU since it totally ignores the benefits of such migration - as the imminent return home of many Romanians will doubtless illustrate in the year ahead.
If you wish to criticise me for being unfairly critical of Brexiteers (not you personally in particular) because my life in Central Europe gives me an insight into these particular migrants, I would acknowledge that, but would point out that (e.g) the Germans or Dutch or Swedish that I know share my beliefs about the nature of the migration above, and that is because they understand the true nature of the European Project. That very phrase seems to strike fear into otherwise highly intellligent Brexiteers, (and I certainly think of some on here in that category).
I was just trying to make the point that a simple government statistic like people "in work" can be very misleading.
Some people "in work" will be doing reasonably rewarding and useful jobs while others may find themselves struggling with jobs which are poorly paid and not particularly productive.
I suggest there is a problem if the headline figure is "95% employment" but most of the work actually falls into the latter category.
I genuinely wasn't trying to imply that people should offset their contribution and consumption etc. I don't really know whether I'm a net contributor or not. Like everybody else I try to do my best!
But if my job didn't seem to be contributing much to society and / or was poorly paid, I would hope to be able to find something better and might expect government policy to help me.
I certainly don't condemn anyone in this situation or believe they should stop working. But the government can't just say these people are "in work" so everything is OK.
I wasn't attempting to dig you out either, so please don't think that I was. That was/is not my intention.
With regards to having a job that contributes to society, I'd hazard a guess that most jobs don't benefit society. By that I mean in a positive manner.
Anyway, two positives from today are that Carl Pistorius' half brother has rightfully had his sentence doubled and Zimbabwe can, hopefully, look towards a brighter future.
Sometimes news from abroad (outside the UK/EU bubble) makes you realise that the problems you face as a country are quite trivial in the grand scheme of things.
I just wanted to congratulate you on coming up with a reason for Leaving that I've never seen before i.e. we need to Leave the EU because we might end up building too many roads, schools, hospitals, etc. if they all go back to their country of birth. What a truly dreadful thing it would be to have too many doctors in the country for example...
The magnitude of which shouldn’t be forgotten in amongst all this brexit nonsense
I'd like to see more people speak up about their attire problems and, maybe, we'll see less Brexit speak.
The whole world's a winner.
Thought control of borders was anathema to Remainers. The EU is however happy to undermine the internal border between the Republic and the UK as a tactic to block discussion on trade.
The implication is that if the border question is not solved to the satisfaction of the EU (Ireland firmly tying it's banner to the EU, impotent to hold an independent and overriding view on what is "sufficient progress") there will be no deal on trade, and as far as the border question is concerned the EU washes its hands of the problem and leaves Ireland and the UK to its own devices. Ireland would be between a rock and a hard place. Ireland will have to choose between - a workable solution that's in conflict with the EU's rules on customs controls - or the peace and security of the island of Ireland. The UK does not have a problem with an open border on the Island and flexible customs controls, only Remainers suggest the Brexit vote means a hard border is inevitable.
The problem is therefore not one of finding a solution that suits Ireland and the UK, it's one that does not undermine the protectionist customs regulations of the EU. The shrill noises from the Irish premier about the lack of progress disguise the real issue, the prospect of him having to make a choice between the EU and the peace of the Island.
Maintaining the peace of Europe is the cornerstone of EU ideology we are told - except it can be put in jeopardy and used as a bargaining chip if there is a challenge to the political ambition of the EU institution.
Brexit may have precipitated a problem, the EU's ambitions are the barrier to a solution.
EEA membership solves it overnight.
We are choosing to leave, against both the will of the EU itself and half our country. We also accepted the timescale for this and agreed the conditions as to the way the negotiations would be handled. We knew the border situation would be a major stumbling block, even before the Tory party got us into hock to the dinosaur deniers, yet went ahead anyway. We decided to refuse to contemplate retaining any sort of associate membership of the EU which may have solved many of the issues identified (even though this was presented as a perfectly acceptable, sensible option by leading Brexit proponents for many years before the vote).
Yet all of this is somehow the fault of the EU.