The Politics Thread 2019

[GboroRam]

Just now, Montgolfier said:

I'm afraid all that does is increases prices paid by consumers. That doesn't just mean completed goods which are imported - that also means that the prices paid by British companies for components imported from the EU which they then use to manufacture goods will increase. This has a further knock-on effect of stifling British exports when the companies try to sell them overseas because, if the tariffs on the imported goods are high (and under the much-lauded WTO rules loved by fans of Mr Rees-Mogg they are - we cannot just charge what we like, we HAVE TO play by the rules), then those exports become uncompetitive and the buyer will just look elsewhere.

"Let's make the components ourselves" you might say. Well, the average motor car has something like 2500 parts, and many of those 'parts' are themselves comprised of hundreds or thousands of components themselves. That's an awful lot of new industries you are going to have to set up from scratch - and an awful lot of expertise you are going to have to import, which doesn't do a lot of good for the earlier poster's wish for the suspension of migration.

Complicated, but not insurmountable, of course.

From my own selfish point of view, I am dreading November 1. My medication is manufactured by Bayer in Germany.

The Buy British Facebook group did suggest that we buy baked beans because they are produced in the UK. 

Apart from the imported beans of course. 

And the imported tomatoes in the sauce. 

[1of4]

17 minutes ago, Van Gritters said:

I thought we should reduce our carbon footprint and make/produce more home grown stuff for ourselves.

Maybe global warming could have some advantages  Can't wait for us to start growing all those nice bendy bananas. 

[GboroRam]

9 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Maybe global warming could have some advantages  Can't wait for us to start growing all those nice bendy bananas. 

We've already had weathermen suggesting that global warming should be good for the UK because increased tourism. 

I'm not worried I'm on fire as I prefer warm weather to the cold. 

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

5 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

You're correct, my mistake and I apologise.

@Van Wolfie has corrected me perfectly - 99% of all imported potatoes come from the EU.

Just to put the other side on this, EU countries will suffer also. Netherlands is estimated to be at risk of losing €4.5bn of trade, Ireland 4% of output, 750,000 of those famous German cars per year.

You won't get economists to agree on much but the one thing they are pretty much aligned on is that nobody wins a trade war and a no deal without contingency puts us immediately in the middle of one - for every product category.

Well, not quite - shouldn't be all doom and gloom about everything. As per August 14th we had trading agreements in place with the following countries so if you want some pilot whale meat, Toblerone, new false teeth or a big fat Samsung HDTV at least that is sorted. And it's taken us three years to get these signed......

• South Korea
• Central America
• Andean countries
• Norway and Iceland
• Caribbean countries
• Pacific Islands
• Liechtenstein
• Israel
• Palestinian Authority
• Switzerland
• The Faroe Islands
• Eastern and Southern Africa
• Chile

We are in trouble no Vatican city, no holly water. Happy with rest though, massive countries in that list

[Eddie]

6 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

We are in trouble no Vatican city, no holly water. Happy with rest though, massive countries in that list

Look on the bright side. A case of coconuts from the Pacific Islands would make a more effective replacement for the Prime Minister and his Cabinet.

[Stive Pesley]

2 hours ago, GboroRam said:

The Buy British Facebook group did suggest that we buy baked beans because they are produced in the UK. 

Apart from the imported beans of course. 

And the imported tomatoes in the sauce. 

And we can even reopen all our prehistoric tin mines to make our own tincans! 

[Carl Sagan]

On 29/08/2019 at 09:59, Montgolfier said:

If he is resident in Spain, he wouldn't have had a vote in the referendum.

 

On 29/08/2019 at 10:09, Spanish said:

yes exactly, massive impact but no vote.  Some may say I don't deserve one but I am a British passport holder and I think I did.

The above two posts show the level of ignorance and disinformation spread regarding the referendum. The voting eligibility was the same as a General Election meaning UK citizens living overseas were allowed to vote so long as they hadn't lived overseas for more than fifteen years (by which time it's deemed they're not coming back). https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/eu-referendum/about

On 29/08/2019 at 15:33, Highgate said:

If there is no deal there will be a hard border.  There simply has to be a hard border.  The EU will quite naturally insist on it in order to protect the integrity of the Single Market, even if the UK doesn't wish to control it's own borders after leaving the EU (although i thought that was a central reason it wished to leave in the first place).

The backstop only relates to a scenario where a deal between the EU and UK is reached,  It will only be enforced if other arrangements can't be agreed or put in place to prevent a hard border.  Brexiteers tell us that there are a multitude of ways that this could and will be achieved, and yet they don't seem to believe it themselves, because if it were true then the dreaded backstop is a mere irrelevance and would never come into play.

The UK has found itself in an admittedly unusual and unenviable position.  It has signed previous treaties not allowing it to agree to anything that would cause a return of a hard border on Ireland, and for parliamentary arithmetical reasons it extended this commitment to all of the UK, not just N.Ireland. If May had not called that election that would never have happened.

The notion of a backstop was intended (when people thought there would be a deal) to prevent a hard border that could spark the return of the dark days N.Ireland has suffered in the past. I feel that the UK, having orchestrated this unusual situation itself (by signing the GFA, then voting for Brexit, then agreeing to DUP demands to extend the backstop to all of the UK), should really just live with the situation it has created and accept the backstop, which remember is designed as a last resort and is intended never to be used. I know this notion is anathema to Brexiteers

The notion of a time limit on the backstop or a unilateral withdrawal from it would render it entirely impotent and pointless. So by necessity, those proposals were always a non-starter.

You are correct in the sense that it has always been a good look (with the electorate) for an Irish political party to appear as tough as it can when negotiating with the British government.  At least, not to appear too weak or to roll over.  And Varadkar's party has traditionally been accused of the latter far more often than it's main rival.  But I think you are wrong if you don't think there is genuine conviction behind his, or his party's insistence on the inclusion of the backstop in any withdrawal agreement.  There is pretty much unanimity in our parliament on the issue.   However, the miscalculation here seems to be that nobody really thought that the UK would actually consider going through with a No Deal Brexit.  The irony may well be, that the very backstop that was designed to prevent a hard border in Ireland may well end up help creating it.  And yet, I cannot see a different course of action for the Irish government.

Appreciate the thoughtful reply. I see many others have replied. If the EU puts up a hard border then it shows me that it's the sort of body I don't want to be a member of.  I've heard dozens of global customs experts say there's absolutely no need and the EU is simply being lazy because logistically it's just easier to put an invisible border in the Irish Sea, based on ports. But it's categorically not necessary and you can have an invisible land border now. They're just too bureaucratic and systems driven to agree to it.

8 hours ago, SchtivePesley said:

Here's a genuine question for the  Leave voters amongst my fellow Rams

Assuming that we definitely leave on 31st October (as Mr Johnson emphatically promises)...

What's on your wish list for things you want the government to enact that EU membership currently prevents it from doing?

 

First, I want us to stop paying our portion of the ten billion Euros a year the EU is now paying African warlords to hold would-be refugees and economic migrants in detention camps in north Africa where they are abused, mistreated horrifically and many die - just to keep Europe white. (It's notable the Brexit Party has the most ethnically diverse MEPs in the EU Parliament, just as Boris's Cabinet is the most ethnically diverse in UK history, but apparently it's the leavers who are rascist.). The EU has a shameful attitude to race generally and is happy to pay blood money as a result. https://time.com/longform/african-slave-trade/

Leaving also halts the tacit UK support for maintaining 40% youth unemployment across southern Europe to power the German economy by undervaluing the Euro. The EU is really a despicable organization for the way it puts political projects ahead of the lives of its young people.

I'd want to tax EU pensions (illegal under May's Withdrawal Agreement) after the likes of the Kinnocks, Mandy and all the rest have accrued tens of millions of pounds in their EU Pension pots at our expense. No wonder they want to stay in.

I'd take the railways, water and power generation into public ownership which is illegal under EU competition rules.

I'd also use state subsidies to build new battery factories and for the Sabre air-breathing rocker engine, investing in industries of the future. I'd prioritize UK industry such as Bombardier in Derby for contracts around the country.

I'd finally support the UK fishing industry after it was sacrificed for EU Membership. Fierce expensive quotas for EU boats using UK national waters.

I'd begin negotiations on free trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, US and China. It takes nearly a decade for a cumbersome 28-nation grouping to do this as we've seen, when it's far more straightforward for the United Kingdom alone.

Of course there's a lot more...

[Eddie]

14 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

The above two posts show the level of ignorance and disinformation spread regarding the referendum

I said that the people most affected by the decision weren't allowed to vote. I never mentioned anything whatsoever about a General election.

Please identify any word which I typed which was incorrect, ignorant or falling within the bounds of any definition, loose or otherwise, of 'disinformation'.

Difficulty: without making up lies or writing a reply on the side of a bus.

[Rev]

9 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

 

The above two posts show the level of ignorance and disinformation spread regarding the referendum. The voting eligibility was the same as a General Election meaning UK citizens living overseas were allowed to vote so long as they hadn't lived overseas for more than fifteen years (by which time it's deemed they're not coming back). https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/eu-referendum/about

Appreciate the thoughtful reply. I see many others have replied. If the EU puts up a hard border then it shows me that it's the sort of body I don't want to be a member of.  I've heard dozens of global customs experts say there's absolutely no need and the EU is simply being lazy because logistically it's just easier to put an invisible border in the Irish Sea, based on ports. But it's categorically not necessary and you can have an invisible land border now. They're just too bureaucratic and systems driven to agree to it.

First, I want us to stop paying our portion of the ten billion Euros a year the EU is now paying African warlords to hold would-be refugees and economic migrants in detention camps in north Africa where they are abused, mistreated horrifically and many die - just to keep Europe white. (It's notable the Brexit Party has the most ethnically diverse MEPs in the EU Parliament, just as Boris's Cabinet is the most ethnically diverse in UK history, but apparently it's the leavers who are rascist.). The EU has a shameful attitude to race generally and is happy to pay blood money as a result. https://time.com/longform/african-slave-trade/

Leaving also halts the tacit UK support for maintaining 40% youth unemployment across southern Europe to power the German economy by undervaluing the Euro. The EU is really a despicable organization for the way it puts political projects ahead of the lives of its young people.

I'd want to tax EU pensions (illegal under May's Withdrawal Agreement) after the likes of the Kinnocks, Mandy and all the rest have accrued tens of millions of pounds in their EU Pension pots at our expense. No wonder they want to stay in.

I'd take the railways, water and power generation into public ownership which is illegal under EU competition rules.

I'd also use state subsidies to build new battery factories and for the Sabre air-breathing rocker engine, investing in industries of the future. I'd prioritize UK industry such as Bombardier in Derby for contracts around the country.

I'd finally support the UK fishing industry after it was sacrificed for EU Membership. Fierce expensive quotas for EU boats using UK national waters.

I'd begin negotiations on free trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, US and China. It takes nearly a decade for a cumbersome 28-nation grouping to do this as we've seen, when it's far more straightforward for the United Kingdom alone.

Of course there's a lot more...

If public ownership of the railways is illegal under EU rules, how come the German state owned rail operator owns some of the UK rail franchises?

As do the Dutch, for that matter.

EDF energy is the French state owned power company, doesn't seem to have stopped them being a big player in the UK energy market.

 

[ramit]

i am going to state something that's been on my mind for a while about Brexit.  You've been played, big time.

The Americans have been encouraging this scenario all along.  When Obama threatened to move Britain to the back of queue he know full well what the reaction of the British public would be, that it would markedly increase support for Brexit.  Clever move that.  Keep in mind that social psychologists are among the main designers of insidious foreign policies of large nations today and so in continuance it makes psychological sense that the next US president Trump become a virtual cheerleader for Brexit.  It's the old bad cop, good cop routine.  Why would the power players in USA want that to happen and preferably in the hardest way, eh?  Because they are not your friends or anybody else's, apart from Israel and only while that suits their agenda.  The bottom line (they love that phrase) is that they see the EU as a potential threat to their global hegemony and thus by throwing their "friends" under the bus their purpose of a weaker EU manifests very nicely indeed.  They don't care even if this means the end of Britain as long as they gain by it.

[GboroRam]

5 hours ago, ramit said:

i am going to state something that's been on my mind for a while about Brexit.  You've been played, big time.

The Americans have been encouraging this scenario all along.  When Obama threatened to move Britain to the back of queue he know full well what the reaction of the British public would be, that it would markedly increase support for Brexit.  Clever move that.  Keep in mind that social psychologists are among the main designers of insidious foreign policies of large nations today and so in continuance it makes psychological sense that the next US president Trump become a virtual cheerleader for Brexit.  It's the old bad cop, good cop routine.  Why would the power players in USA want that to happen and preferably in the hardest way, eh?  Because they are not your friends or anybody else's, apart from Israel and only while that suits their agenda.  The bottom line (they love that phrase) is that they see the EU as a potential threat to their global hegemony and thus by throwing their "friends" under the bus their purpose of a weaker EU manifests very nicely indeed.  They don't care even if this means the end of Britain as long as they gain by it.

I don't see it in any other way. Some people still think there's a great deal coming. Let's see. 

Personality I fear for the NHS. And I think people have been so well played, they'll say even losing the NHS is a price worth paying. 

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

7 hours ago, Montgolfier said:

I said that the people most affected by the decision weren't allowed to vote. I never mentioned anything whatsoever about a General election.

Please identify any word which I typed which was incorrect, ignorant or falling within the bounds of any definition, loose or otherwise, of 'disinformation'.

Difficulty: without making up lies or writing a reply on the side of a bus.

I would not say most affected but as an EU citizem who studied, lived in the UK, married under british law with an english wife and children, paid taxes in blighty for over 20 years, it Was a bit odd that i could not vote but still get kicked out. 

Hey oh the loon has landed at no. 10 lets see how it goes...

[Eddie]

39 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

I would not say most affected but as an EU citizem who studied, lived in the UK, married under british law with an english wife and children, paid taxes in blighty for over 20 years, it Was a bit odd that i could not vote but still get kicked out. 

Hey oh the loon has landed at no. 10 lets see how it goes...

Something like this...

[Stive Pesley]

58 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

as an EU citizem who studied, lived in the UK, married under british law with an english wife and children, paid taxes in blighty for over 20 years, it Was a bit odd that i could not vote but still get kicked out.

And before people say that you won't get kicked out...this is shameful and makes you wonder where we'll end up. Detention centres presumably, there are hundreds of thousands of people who have lived and contributed here for years that will be caught up in this fascist BS

 

https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1VK0CV

[WhiteHorseRam]

8 hours ago, ramit said:

i am going to state something that's been on my mind for a while about Brexit.  You've been played, big time.

The Americans have been encouraging this scenario all along.  When Obama threatened to move Britain to the back of queue he know full well what the reaction of the British public would be, that it would markedly increase support for Brexit.  Clever move that.  Keep in mind that social psychologists are among the main designers of insidious foreign policies of large nations today and so in continuance it makes psychological sense that the next US president Trump become a virtual cheerleader for Brexit.  It's the old bad cop, good cop routine.  Why would the power players in USA want that to happen and preferably in the hardest way, eh?  Because they are not your friends or anybody else's, apart from Israel and only while that suits their agenda.  The bottom line (they love that phrase) is that they see the EU as a potential threat to their global hegemony and thus by throwing their "friends" under the bus their purpose of a weaker EU manifests very nicely indeed.  They don't care even if this means the end of Britain as long as they gain by it.

I see where you are coming from … but ..

I think there is absolutely no chance Obama and Trump could possibly have acted in cahoots in anyway, they are so far apart politically and as people. The current presidency is all about the man behind the desk in the Oval Office and nothing more.

[WhiteHorseRam]

10 hours ago, SchtivePesley said:

And we can even reopen all our prehistoric tin mines to make our own tincans! 

Poldark-tastic!!

[CWC1983]

Meanwhile, as we all debate the pro's and con's of brexit, some people are getting rich on it......

Pretty disgusting all round. 

[WhiteHorseRam]

10 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I'd take the railways, water and power generation into public ownership which is illegal under EU competition rules.

I'd also use state subsidies to build new battery factories and for the Sabre air-breathing rocker engine, investing in industries of the future. I'd prioritize UK industry such as Bombardier in Derby for contracts around the country.

I'd finally support the UK fishing industry after it was sacrificed for EU Membership. Fierce expensive quotas for EU boats using UK national waters.

I'd begin negotiations on free trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, US and China. It takes nearly a decade for a cumbersome 28-nation grouping to do this as we've seen, when it's far more straightforward for the United Kingdom alone.

All good stuff post BREXIT, I'd vote for your manifesto ...

I would personally add -  build the RN up to 50 modern surface ships and develop the Royal Corps of Signals into a full blown cyber warfare attack/defence arm … but that's just me ...?

 

Unfortunately, the manifestos of the three long-standing parties right now are -

1. Jeez! Get BREXIT done ASAP to stop that other party moving onto our right-wing turf and splitting our core vote for ever. Oh, and see my mates right with some tasty spending cuts (when we can).

2. Jeez! Watch out for those nasty Blairites under the bed! Configure everything to stop plots, that way we can still listen to Billy Bragg/be applauded at Glastonbury, etc.

3. Taking Cheltenham and Yeovil would be nice.

[Spanish]

10 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

The above two posts show the level of ignorance and disinformation spread regarding the referendum. The voting eligibility was the same as a General Election me

Are you calling me ignorant?  I accept that I can’t and shouldn’t vote in general elections but this one is something v different

[ramit]

1 hour ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

I see where you are coming from … but ..

I think there is absolutely no chance Obama and Trump could possibly have acted in cahoots in anyway, they are so far apart politically and as people. The current presidency is all about the man behind the desk in the Oval Office and nothing more.

Yes, but that's the funny bit, US presidents are simply stage performers who do the bidding of their owners, the money movers.

It's just a show.  US foreign policy remains the same from one president to another.  Trump campaigned for no more interventionist wars around the globe, yet troops are still in Iraq, still in Syria stealing the oil in cahoots with terrorists, still in Afghanistan and he openly declares that he wants to steal Venezuela oil because that would be good for American businesses.  Tactics change, policy doesn't.