Politics, politics, politics

[SpurMeUp]

Rubbish. Poland was the fastest growing economy in the EU last year and does very well out of membership. They will also do very well out of Brexit, it has a small but growing financial sector and is seeing a number of companies relocate there.

The EUs growth has been higher than UK growth post brexit vote. Meanwhile the pound has fallen 15% or more, inflation has increased, and everything imported costs us Brits 15%-20% more as does foreign travel. Hardly evidence of the collapse of the EU that @Gutter Boy and others predict.

Remind me, what are we gaining by exiting the EU?

 

[r-u-s-x]

The constitution changes Lisbon Treaty? Can't have a new constitution? We'll just call it a treaty. Voted out the treaty? We'll just keep asking until we get the answer we want.

It wasn't just us, there were plenty of countries that required a referendum to ratify constitution changes IIRC.

I understand what we have vetoes against, I just don't trust the EU to not force those things through by the back channels.

Did we not sign up to the Lisbon treaty? Not sure we required a referendum for a constitutional treaty either other countries did.

If they keep asking we could have kept saying no, can't see how it was forced on us?

 

[scaramanga]

Did we not sign up to the Lisbon treaty? Not sure we required a referendum for a constitutional treaty either other countries did.

If they keep asking we could have kept saying no, can't see how it was forced on us?

We had been promised a referendum by the government on any new EU constitution. The EU stopped calling it a new constitution and called it a treaty to get around that and other countries that needed to vote on it.

It was Ireland that kept getting asked - there's a huge amount of bitterness there still over the whole thing. Plenty of people feel as if they were stitched up by it all.

 

[r-u-s-x]

But you concede the EU couldn't force either the constitution or treaty on the uk which was the point you were arguing.

 

[Gutter Boy]

The EUs growth has been higher than UK growth post brexit vote. Meanwhile the pound has fallen 15% or more, inflation has increased, and everything imported costs us Brits 15%-20% more as does foreign travel. Hardly evidence of the collapse of the EU that @Gutter Boy and others predict.

Remind me, what are we gaining by exiting the EU?

The pound falling is a very good thing for the economy. A country can only be sustainable if it's balance of payments is in order. Exports are much more important than imports and holidays. Devaluing the currency is good for business. It what austerity policies have been trying to achieve for years.

Similarly the inflation target is 2%. It's been practically zero for nearly a decade. It's now crept up to 2.7% and is expected to peak at 3% then drop again; but is closer to optimum than it has been for years.

 

[SpurMeUp]

The pound falling is a very good thing for the economy. A country can only be sustainable if it's balance of payments is in order. Exports are much more important than imports and holidays. Devaluing the currency is good for business. It what austerity policies have been trying to achieve for years.

Similarly the inflation target is 2%. It's been practically zero for nearly a decade. It's now crept up to 2.7% and is expected to peak at 3% then drop again; but is closer to optimum than it has been for years.

You know this is nonsense. The failing pound is good for exports of course. But that is where it ends.

The uk trade imbalance hadn't been an issue - for what decades? Part of the reason it's not a problem is we get a lot of foreign investment - car manufacturers, foreign property investment etc etc. Brexit threatens these inflows of money into the UK and we don't manufacture enough to to make it up with exports.

The lower pound signifies a downgrading of the UK economy. That's not my opinion, it's the markets collective judgment of Brexit and the shaky prospects for the UK. It's been priced in. Hopefully things will change, and the pound will strengthen.

Probably the two greatest costs of Brexit so far, which haven't been measured, are reductions to investment in the UK, and stasis in the UK government. Investors in the UK and government ministries are leaving things on the back burner until they know what's happening. Why wouldn't they? There is probably some offset however with uk companies and London property effectively being 20% off at the moment, meaning bargain hunters are still investing in the uk.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[scaramanga]

But you concede the EU couldn't force either the constitution or treaty on the uk which was the point you were arguing.

It absolutely could - it could just keep downgrading the description of the document containing it until it was something that we couldn't veto - the same way it got around referendums.

 

[r-u-s-x]

It absolutely could - it could just keep downgrading the description of the document containing it until it was something that we couldn't veto - the same way it got around referendums.

Every thing you say is true but is not what you were arguing.

Milo said

In reality, can anyone think of anything that the EU has imposed on us?

We agreed to sign the treaty of Lisbon.

 

[scaramanga]

Every thing you say is true but is not what you were arguing.

Milo said

In reality, can anyone think of anything that the EU has imposed on us?

We agreed to sign the treaty of Lisbon.

We agreed to sign a treaty, they forced a constitution on us, disguised as a treaty.

 

[r-u-s-x]

So we didn't know what was in the treaty? Or did they add powers to it after we signed up?

Call it a treaty or a constitution we still (reluctantly) signed it.

The fact this is your example of the EU forcing policy on us strengthens milos point imo.

 

[scaramanga]

So we didn't know what was in the treaty? Or did they add powers to it after we signed up?

Call it a treaty or a constitution we still (reluctantly) signed it.

The fact this is your example of the EU forcing policy on us strengthens milos point imo.

Just because Gordon Brown was complicit in the deceit, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Do you feel that is a logical position.

Every thing you say is fundamentally true except the link it was forced on us, the pm had the power to sign the treaty for the uk. It was not forced on us.

 

[scaramanga]

Do you feel that is a logical position.

Every thing you say is fundamentally true except the link it was forced on us, the pm had the power to sign the treaty for the uk. It was not forced on us.

It was forced on the British people.

We were due a referendum on the new constitution, samples suggested it would have been declined with an 80% share if the vote or more.

By calling it a treaty, we were robbed of the democratic choice we were owed. It may not have been forced on our government but it was forced on the people

 

[r-u-s-x]

Right and now show me the link where the EU forced the uk government to do that and you have a bullseye.

 

[Gutter Boy]

You know this is nonsense. The failing pound is good for exports of course. But that is where it ends.

The uk trade imbalance hadn't been an issue - for what decades? Part of the reason it's not a problem is we get a lot of foreign investment - car manufacturers, foreign property investment etc etc. Brexit threatens these inflows of money into the UK and we don't manufacture enough to to make it up with exports.

The lower pound signifies a downgrading of the UK economy. That's not my opinion, it's the markets collective judgment of Brexit and the shaky prospects for the UK. It's been priced in. Hopefully things will change, and the pound will strengthen.

Probably the two greatest costs of Brexit so far, which haven't been measured, are reductions to investment in the UK, and stasis in the UK government. Investors in the UK and government ministries are leaving things on the back burner until they know what's happening. Why wouldn't they? There is probably some offset however with uk companies and London property effectively being 20% off at the moment, meaning bargain hunters are still investing in the uk.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

A financial services economy isn't sustainable or good for the country. It's diametrically opposed to an industrial strategy.

This is kickstarting the rebalancing of the economy that we've been crying out for for 20 years. We'll have to start doing things of worth again, not moving money in circles with a few creaming off the profits

 

[monkeybarry]

The UK's financial contribution ending could be a trigger of that.

Either eastern and southern European members are going to get a lot less subsidies, or the German taxpayer is going to rebel at have to bear an even greater load to fund siestas, waste and corruption (WW2 guilt only goes so far).

A financial services economy isn't sustainable or good for the country. It's diametrically opposed to an industrial strategy.

This is kickstarting the rebalancing of the economy that we've been crying out for for 20 years. We'll have to start doing things of worth again, not moving money in circles with a few creaming off the profits

I see alot of youth unemployment and cheap foreign labour to achieve that.

 

[Gutter Boy]

I see alot of youth unemployment and cheap foreign labour to achieve that.

Not with an industrial strategy + degrowth

We make what we need. We make extra to sell in order to buy the things we can't make/extract/grow. We share the required work around and put our feet up when it is done. Localism of energy and food production and use. Post-neo-liberalism

 

[scaramanga]

Right and now show me the link where the EU forced the uk government to do that and you have a bullseye.

I thought I was quite clear the the government of the time was in collusion with the EU to sneak the constitution past the people.

It was the electorate that it was forced upon, with a lame duck PM just walking it through without question.

 

[r-u-s-x]

You really dig in don't you. If this is your best example then I would say Milos point seems pretty valid to me.

The EU did not force UK to sign the treaty of Lisbon they didn't have the power to.

Every UK government sneaks policy past the electorate, renegades on manifesto pledges etc.

I have a feeling if it suited your argument you would be talking about democratically elected Government representing the UK etc.

 

[scaramanga]

You really dig in don't you. If this is your best example then I would say Milos point seems pretty valid to me.

The EU did not force UK to sign the treaty of Lisbon they didn't have the power to.

Initially the EU couldn't get a constitution agreed so it labelled it a treaty to get that done. If your opinion is that the EU wouldn't have further downgraded that treaty to a document that didn't require the UK to sign, had we refused, then we will have to agree to disagree. We can only judge people by their actions and those of the EU to that point were underhand and undemocratic. It's my firm belief that they would have continued in that manner until they had the result they wished for.

What they did in Ireland reminds me of dodgy scientists P-hacking. Just repeat the referendum again and again, stopping when you have the answer you initially decided you were going to get.

Every UK government sneaks policy past the electorate, renegades on manifesto pledges etc.

I have a feeling if it suited your argument you would be talking about democratically elected Government representing the UK etc.

And the solution to governments acting in an undemocratic manner is to apply a less accountable and less democratic layer on top?

If the constitution had been called a constitution (as it was in material) then it would not have been approved. Gordon Brown's actions were disgusting and he should also be accountable for what happened, but that doesn't excuse the EU of what they did either.