***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 60 *****
==============================================================
And the discussion continues
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 17 Oct 18 at 11:02
|
Got into work yesterday to find our benefit checking tool had expired on 7th so was 'not valid' for calculations after that date.
A bit of inquiring by the Senior Session Supervisor gave assurance there were no major changes and we could use it with a workround to 'frig' cases with crucial birthday in next couple of days.
Message that came back upstairs included something about Brexit being a factor which initially made no sense until I spoke directly to supervisor. October is six months after the usual April date for benefit changes/uprating. System has a break at that point to force users to upgrade so as to pick up any intervening legislation - there are usually a few tweaks.
On this occasion nothing. Major factor in that is that Westmionster and Whitehall are so log jammed with Brexit related stuff that necessary legislation isn't even being tabled.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 16:58
|
Job advert for Resilience Advisers: EU Exit Readiness and Response Support to Local Preparedness
on Civil Service website.
www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?jcode=1603914
|
Might be odd to you, but from day one I knew it was going to be a good time for consultants. I think I even said so in here.
It's like Y2K all over again.
8-)
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 21:38
|
"Developing and delivering any necessary funding mechanisms; liaising closely with the wider RED teams to ensure appropriate read-across to wider strategy and policy work; and taking an active and leading role in the delivery of these plans"
Why on Earth do they write such drivel?
|
|
Might we not need more than 3 of these?
|
>>Why on Earth do they write such drivel?
I know what they want, spent far too long answering such stuff, but it could be written with much greater clarity.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 22:01
|
>>Why on Earth do they write such drivel?
It's mandatory.
Have a paragraph from a 5 page plan I had to decipher...(XXX'd out anything that makes it traceable)
"The model described in the November XXXX paper, and in section 4 above, draws on work on the ground from e.g. in XXX-town, and the analysis of what has worked most successfully in other integration pilot work. It is clear that successful integration recognises the importance of focussing primarily on the person/client/patient, putting them in control, planning holistically and building proactive locality service models which support that approach. This allows trust and confidence to be built not only with local populations but over time supports the redesign of the interface with specialist services and ultimately changing hospital service configuration. As an example, XXX-town has the lowest per capita number of acute beds in the UK and the lowest rate of admissions for older people. These person focussed locality based approaches recognise that culture change happens as a result of frontline professionals working together with individual clients/patients: approaches which start conceptually and top down usually fail. This approach also recognises pragmatically that everything is not within local control e.g. contracts and that some deeply rooted professional practice and organisational issues are best worked with on a local level. The data deficit and the priority of development of population standardised data for planning purposes is a generally recognised theme. Reflecting the demographic and financial challenges ahead, many pilots in England set a strategic context for the development of localities, while creating the conditions for local engagement, creativity and solutions. In many places the link between improving quality for individuals (getting service right first time every time) and efficiency was explicitly made. Many integrated pilots noted the change in population behaviours in relation to services e.g. A and E attendance merely as a result of the community being engaged in discussion about service redesign."
Now that's a paragraph (292 words - the equivalent of a handwritten side of A4), and at the time it was written a few years ago its author was on around £130k/year.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 22:22
|
|
Are your reports in management-speak too? Do your clients feel short changed if they are in plain English?
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 22:28
|
>> Now that's a paragraph (292 words - the equivalent of a handwritten side of A4),
>> and at the time it was written a few years ago its author was on
>> around £130k/year.
Well I recognise 'right first time' as a theme from my service in a the world of citizen/state disputes....
|
Here's interesting;
I randomly took a chunk of words out of the middle;
"many pilots in England set a strategic context for the development of localities"
and stuck it in Google.
Predictably and unsurprisingly the text wasn't found.
However what was surprising, given the total lack of any health care related words in my chosen search string, was that 18 out of the first 20 entries that came up on the first page of my Google Search were for NHS URLs. And not even for the same or similar subjects, but virtually all NHS.
I'm sure that should tell me something.
I worked for the Wessex Trust in the early 80s, as a consultant. It was quite the most ridiculous organisation I have visited in all my years of ridiculous companies.
|
>
>> I worked for the Wessex Trust in the early 80s, as a consultant. It was
>> quite the most ridiculous organisation I have visited in all my years of ridiculous companies.
So was it you that purchased that totally unnecessary IBM Mainframe for the trust?
|
Why on Earth do they write such drivel?
>>
They probably only want people who speak/write/understand such language to apply. Perhaps a way of filtering potential applicants.
|
Doesn't read as drivel to me. That's not to say I don't recognise drivel when I see it, but maybe you are just a tad out of touch with the world of work, and/or the 21st century way of doing things? That's not meant to be offensive at all...
Lygonos' example is, however, drivel. Mainly cos it's too long and one loses the will to read the lot.
(Disclaimer: I am not an ex civil servant!!)
|
Businesses have been writing that guff for years. I had to plow through enough of it working for a US company. I sometimes used to write a precis of our CEO's latest meandering Mission Statement into plain English or whatever just for the hell of it.
Of course the bit I quoted has a meaning of sorts but it could be expressed in a third of the words used and at the same time be a lot clearer.
It's mostly done to make the mundane seem complex and important and arrived here courtesy of American business in the eighties.
It's sad to see that's our civil service is now badly infected with this virus.
|
>> Why?
>>
Because people like people who are like them.
|
>> "Developing and delivering any necessary funding mechanisms; liaising closely with the wider RED teams
>> to ensure appropriate read-across to wider strategy and policy work; and taking an active and
>> leading role in the delivery of these plans"
>>
>> Why on Earth do they write such drivel?
Other than the dubious term "read-across" that seems pretty clear to me. And I detest communications and reports with extra, unrequired or unnecessarily unusual words. I didn't even find it difficult to read.
39 words and you reckon you could write it in 13? I don't think so. I'm not sure you could shorten it very much, if at all, without losing meaning.
Or maybe I just need to get out more.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 04:05
|
Brompton>> necessary legislation
Spoken like a true civil servant. I'm not sure we really need much more legislation, actually.
|
This is the highlights of Chequers proposal.
Source: www.lbc.co.uk/news/the-news-explained/theresa-mays-chequers-deal-explained/
1. Leaving the European Union on the 29th March 2019.
2. Ending free movement and taking back control of our borders.
3. No more sending vast sums of money each year to the EU.
4. A new business friendly customs model with freedom to strike new trade deals around the world.
5. UK-EU free trade area with a common rulebook for industrial goods and agricultural products which will be good for jobs.
6. Commitment to maintain high standards on consumer and employment rights and the environment.
7. Parliamentary lock on all new rules and regulations.
8. Leaving the Common Agricultural Policy and Common Fisheries Policy.
9. Restoring the supremacy of British courts by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK.
10. No hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
11. Continued close cooperation on security to keep our people safe.
12. An independent foreign and defence policy working closely with the EU and other allies.
It doesn't look bad. I understand
[a] EU has not accepted it but why?
[b] some leavers are against it but why?
For [a] am I right that EU wants freedom of movement to continue and they want to keep NI customs sperate from Great Britain. Is that correct?
|
EU will not accept 5 - if we want that we need to remain in the single market.
Your number 10 is not possible without 5.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 13:54
|
But what about remaining in CM but not in SM?
SM means accepting 4 freedoms but CM does not require that.
I think (subjective opinion) for the masses successful Brexit means stopping freedom of movement (don't think many people care about 3 other freedoms).
Who created these 4 freedoms? Was it decided via vote or something similar? Who can change this? Why not it is 3 or 5?
|
>>Who created these 4 freedoms?
This will explain where they come from, and touches on some of the issues. It's a bit opinionated, which you should bear in mind, but it will help your understanding of their history, I think.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-four-pillars-of-the-eu-are-crumbling-but-it-still-hasn-t-noticed-qgp8pbgbg
|
That Times link is behind a paywall.
I also believe that there would be a deal but 2 year transition will there by default (until 2021). EU and our MPs likely to keep us in transition for an infinite period. Both side (UK & EU) would claim victory but both remainers and leavers would be upset.
However, this wil just push the issue further into the future rather than resolving it (unless there is a clear separation from EU - not a fudged atempt). To demonstrate Brexit has been delivered govt. has to do something with FOM.
I am not sure if ECJ is a problem for common man on the street.
I think EU is anti-democratic because 4 freedoms were not chosen by people nor EU is willing to compromise on that (in spite of knowing FOM was a driving force behind Brexit). Once UK leaves then it is only matter time some other countries leave EU too (unless EU goes thru major overhaul).
(nothing other than a few subject header changes. Would have been made easier if you replied to the post referring to the Times link and not the BBC one!)
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:39
|
>>That Times link is behind a paywall.
Register, it will give you access to two free articles, including that one. Put some effort in.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:17
|
Again resorted to personal attacks. Before coming to UK I read that British people are courteous and humorous. Are you really British? I think you don't live in UK - so guess even if you were lost the good traits by now.
Edit: I see that you have now deleted part of your original post. So clearly realized what you wrote was not nice.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:37
|
Ok, if you prefer.
I wrote that you didn't read what I wrote, put no effort into understanding it, didn't try to verify or dispute it elsewhere and, despite your efforts that you claim to write such analysis, you clearly do not.
I would class that as a description, not an attack.
I did not delete it because it was not nice, I deleted it because I decided you were not worth the effort and probably lacked the ability to understand it anyway..
>>Are you really British? I think you don't live in UK - so guess even if you were lost the good traits by now.
Only around idiots. Especially hypocritical idiots who take advantage of stuff and then try to yank the drawbridge up behind them exhibiting the worst of selfishness and self-interest without having the first idea of what they are doing.
p.s. oh, and I also asked if you had every used the name "Fluffy".
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:37
|
>> then try to yank the drawbridge up
OK someone has difficulty understanding simple English language I see :-)
I came via work permit/highly skilled category route. That drawbridge is still avilable as long as someone is qualified enough to make use of it.
Unskilled EU migrants are now nervous that they won't be able to compete with people from Asia, Africa, Americas etc. after it becomes a level playing field. That's why they are upset.
So who is really having trouble with the drawbridge?
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:38
|
You came to a country which was part of the EU. You then decided that country should not be part of the EU.
You made a decision about something you don't understand because you, as an immigrant, want to stop immigrants.
That is your right, but it's a pretty sucky attitude.
I don't really understand your comment about understanding the English language. Don't forget to call one of your little gang to put a green tick on yours and a frowny on mine.
It's their alternative to adding value.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:38
|
>> You came to a country which was part of the EU. You then decided that country should not be part of the EU.
Majority of people of UK decided that way because govt. asked us to choose. So I don't consider it as a valid argument.
Some people even change their spouses - all I have chosen is to leave an undemocractic political union. :-)
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:39
|
>>Before coming to UK I read that British people are courteous and humorous<<
We are Movi, don't ever doubt that there is a whole UK world out there outside of car4play who would be more than happy to discuss things with you with respect and humour.
This is the only place it happens as far as I know and that is because it's allowed to go unchecked.
Pat
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:38
|
yawn.
Change the record.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 16:38
|
>>[a] EU has not accepted it but why?
>>[b] some leavers are against it but why?
a)
They maintain that they are not willing to give the same or similar privileges to non-members that members receive.
They maintain that they want all the same protections that the UK wants, but for the EU. Borders, movement, control etc. etc.
I was told recently by a man that should know, that he believed the EU would play hard ball until the last minute and then make concessions.
That could be, though it surprises me a little. However, as I said, the man who told me should know.
b)
Remember that the motivations of the leavers and the motivations of the remainers was fundamentally different. Before anyone starts jumping up and down this is, of course, a generalisation and I am passing no comment as to right/wrong or better/worse.
But, to generalise, leavers were primarily concerned about sovereignty. Even the concerns about immigration essentially came back to sovereignty.
By and large the remainers were more motivated by economic, financial and legal reasons.
Because of that the approach to compromise is different. Again generalising, remainers don't really care what you call it, aren't that bothered about sovereignty but want to keep as much of the previous environment as possible, though know that they will have to lose some to one degree or another.
For a leaver how can one compromise leaving? You can't leave a bit anymore than you can be a bit pregnant. In general the leaver is not driven by financial, economic or legal reasons beyond want to leave the EU and regain sovereignty.
Their belief is that The Chequers Agreement does not recover that sovereignty.
From my own point of view the main stumbling block is the ECJ. Not because it should be, or even that it particularly is, but it is most certainly perceived to be.
My prediction; we will leave with a deal. That deal will come with a 2 year period of transition, and for those two years we will have to accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ, though we may well phrase it in a way which tries to make it look like we do not.
For those two years I believe that it is impossible to avoid the ECJ jurisdiction, they oversee every agreement and we cannot remake them all in time.
Then those two years will largely consist of various industries and companies negotiating their own position, independent of the law or the EU. I believe that those deals will largely be BEANO based.
Though one advantage will be that I doubt they will have any impact or effect on any other deals we wish to sign with other countries or areas.
The Governments, WTO, EU and others will still control tariffs. Contrary to the overly simplistic belief simply adopting the WTO tariffs would be difficult and bad for the UK. Very bad.
But a two year transition ought to be sufficient to get that sorted out.
The issue with the Irish border is not what it is now. (low traffic of goods, services, people, money between NI and I, and high between NI & the rest of the UK) but what it would become with that loose border in place.
The loss of freedom is a mistake, I believe. Perhaps we should have retained free-ish movement with very low visa requirement thresholds. Hopefully that will be the end point. Anybody who is not a drain on the country they are going to should be able to move freely in my opinion.
One stumbling block to the cooperation on security and defence is that the majority if that is data based. If you recall the recent argument between us and the US about extradition, evidence and the death penalty, then there is a similar issue.
The EU data sharing involves also being signed up to pretty strict data protection and usage structure. Unfortunately that [pretty reasonable] agreement is overseen by the ECJ.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 14:35
|
>> [b] some leavers are against it but why?
I'm sure you've asked this and had an answer before. It's not Brexity enough for the likes of Rees-Mogg. David Davis says it leaves us permanently hitched to EU standards - a rule taker not a rule maker and electorally disastrous for the Tory party.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/09/david-davis-warns-tory-mps-chequers-cost-party-election
Serious doubt about whether she can get it past the Commons.
|
>>Serious doubt about whether she can get it past the Commons.
I guess you read what I sent you.
The argument being that the vote will not be between deal a and deal b, but will be between the deal and chaos.
I guess the difference is that I am not so confident that the various clowns involved would stop short of shooting the country in the foot.
I fear they are stupid enough to argue about the Ts & Cs of the transition period.
|
>>I guess the difference is that I am not so confident that the various clowns involved would stop short of shooting the country in the foot.
Good news is that you have been given an indication that the EU will be likely not to shoot itself in the foot. With regard to the clowns, common sense must also prevail - otherwise there will never be a Brexit of any flavour.
|
>>It's not Brexity enough for the likes of Rees-Mogg. David Davis says it leaves us permanently hitched to EU standards - a rule taker not a rule maker and electorally disastrous for the Tory party.
Yeah, that.
So much more concise than my reply.
|
>>For [a] am I right that EU wants freedom of movement to continue and they want to keep NI customs sperate from Great Britain. Is that correct?
The EU does not believe that we should 'cherry-pick'. And that we take everything or nothing.
I believe that in the short term the NI border will not be an issue. What it will become two years from now is more of a concern.
However, the EU's position is that there must be a hard border between EU & Non-EU but they concede that a hard border on the land mass Ireland would be bad, impractical, unenforceable and cause trouble and future disruption.
The UK refuses a hard border between NI & the rest of The UK for sovereignty issues, economic issues and future political issues. The UK also acknowledges that a hard border between NI & I would be bad for the above reasons. The UK also believes that all of the UK should receive the same conditions, not single out a single part for different treatment.
|
www.bbc.com/news/business-45811006
You need to read the whole article, not just the headlines.
"Mr Glen added he would do all he could to ensure that the City of London remained a major financial centre."
Oh well that's alright then. Not.
Two things come out of this;
1) Exiting without a transition agreement *would* be a disaster. Honestly what the deal is like is not as important as it existing and coming with a transition period.
2) Over those two years we need to ensure that London remains the logical and an attractive place to base financial operations.
I expect us to fail on 2) in the long term but manage to make its prominence fade slowly rather than crash and burn. Perhaps we're too reliant on it anyway.
|
"crash and burn"
I sometimes get the feeling that that would delight some of our more northerly colleagues, regardless of the consequences.
|
|
I don't think we have any SNP fanatics here.
|
>>I don't think we have any SNP fanatics here.
My take was that 'northern' included north of England.
The effect of London losing its status as a major centre of finance would be a loss of UK GDP far greater than the "EU dividend".
Last edited by: Lygonos on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 17:22
|
|
If the country loses the taxes paid as a result of the City of London and finance, the impact on everyone including those up north won't be good. Some might not like the idea of someone getting a 7 figure bonus payment but lets not forget they pay a lot of tax on that and so we all benefit.
|
I genuinely forgot the smiley!!
But yes, 'northern' included north of England.
"
|
Worth the price though, right?
Yet more stuff we need to sort out. BEANO is the answer of course. Even if it is a patchwork BEANO.
www.bbc.com/news/business-45789503
>>But UK universities are concerned that after Brexit they will not be able to join the next even bigger research round, worth about 100 billion euro (£88bn).
Well, at least we've got that weekly £350m to cover it.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 11 Oct 18 at 03:37
|
"Worth the price though, right?"
At the weekend, I had to pay £9 for an EU approved light bulb for the bathroom; I used to buy 4 for a quid.
|
>>I had to pay £9 for an EU approved light bulb for the bathroom; I used to buy 4 for a quid.
Y'all can still get 'em - on the Bay.
|
>> At the weekend, I had to pay £9 for an EU approved light bulb for
>> the bathroom;
No you didn't. You didn't have to buy an Eu approved one and you didn't have to pay 9 quid for it
You chose to. Probably so you could whine about the EU.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 11 Oct 18 at 09:45
|
"No you didn't. You didn't have to buy an Eu approved one and you didn't have to pay 9 quid for it "
Yes I did - it was the only one that would that would fit our light assembly. Since when did you qualify as a light bulb consultant?
|
AH so its a LIGHT FITTING foisted on you by the EU.
Clearly my lighting knowledge puts yours in the shade.
And you still didn't need to pay 9 quid for it And you still could have got an non EU approved bulb for it.
Come to that you didn't need to buy an EU approved light fitting.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 11 Oct 18 at 09:58
|
Read my original post - where did I complain about the EU?
You should stick to puff puffs.
|
08:59
You cant even remember what you wrote just over an hour ago
|
"You cant even remember what you wrote just over an hour ago"
Admit it, Zed, you were just looking for an EU-based argument. If the EU were serious about the environment, they'd ban you lot from flying to your cruise holidays, and they would leave me in peace to have a shave.
|
I'm not wasn't me that complained about having to pay 9 quid for a light bulb because of the EU.
|
"I'm not wasn't me that complained about having to pay 9 quid for a light bulb because of the EU. "
I was merely laying a fact before you - not complaining. I thoroughly enjoy having to pay 36x what I used to pay for a light bulb; I consider it to be excellent value.
|
I paid 12 quid in ASDA for 8 small bayonet LED candle bulbs for a chandelier last week.
Drops the power use from 320 watts to under 50 watts.
Stupid EU.
|
>> Since when did you qualify as a light bulb consultant?
He's always having bright ideas.
Still, it makes for an illuminating argument ;)
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 11 Oct 18 at 12:47
|
For some reason this made me remember this sixties TV advert. Not saying of course that there are flashy or dim types on the forum. :-)
youtu.be/yKDH-cuH3nE
|
Whilst I don't contribute to the Brexit discussions here, for various reasons, that doesn't mean I don't have thoughts, discussions and opinions. I fondly imagined everyone did, to some extent.
However, I see the front page of the Daily Star today actually says
"Brexit guarantee! No boring Brexit stories in this paper - until something actually happens!"
Really? Their readership, however many that might be, is so bored by Brexit the Star thinks they will sell more papers NOT talking about it? I find that surprising.
|
|
I don't find it surprising in the slightest, as I've said before on here, there's a great deal many people that find politics uninteresting and I include brexit in that.
|
That's true. The problem is that those who find politics uninteresting and who make no attempt to understand the issues involved still get to vote.
|
|
I think that, by and large, they are much less likely to vote anyway.
|
Politics might not be interesting but whatever decisions politicians make it affects our lives.
Nothing boring about what is going to happen to this country after we leave the E.U.That word Brexit it sounds like S.There will be a deal which nobody will like but it will be accepted.
New elections another referendum you never know I might be able to vote.I can't see that happening either, we will muddle through.
|
>> I don't find it surprising in the slightest, as I've said before on here, there's
>> a great deal many people that find politics uninteresting and I include brexit in that.
+1
And I'm also a Daily Star reader too.
|
Politics is deeply irritating and frustrating, based as it is on opinions which obviously may differ from my own. I think to an extent we all think we can see the right way forward.
One of the serious deficiencies of our democracy is the knowledge, awareness and attitude of the voters. It's good to seek information. And in discussions such as the Brexit one here, one often learns a fact or encounters a perspective which causes new thought.
The biggest idiot on the planet Earth knows at least one thing that the biggest genius does not know. The genius is the fool if he does not try to discover what it is.
It is only those that refuse to listen or consider that make debate or discussion irritating.
|
>> And I'm also a Daily Star reader too.
It's good entertainment, it's just not news.
|
>> It's good entertainment, it's just not news.
>>
Thats should be "SHOCK, Its GOOD entertainment, its not JUST news"
|
When I used to commute by train in the UK I always took a copy of the Sun and a copy of the FT with me.
Pretty much covered all the bases.
|
>> When I used to commute by train in the UK I always took a copy
>> of the Sun and a copy of the FT with me.
>>
>> Pretty much covered all the bases.
One of my teachers at school told similar story about somebody he knew who was reader of Times and Morning Star.
|
>> When I used to commute by train in the UK I always took a copy of the Sun and a copy of the FT with me.
>>
>> Pretty much covered all the bases.
One to read, and the other if you were caught short with no loo roll available ;)
|
>> One to read, and the other if you were caught short with no loo roll available ;)
Nah, I bet he had the Sun open inside the FT.
|
Having no idea, I had a Google for the circulation figures for the Star. Assuming the page to be true, the figures for the Telegraph and the Star are pretty much the same, at about a third of a million a day. Even the top paper, The Sun, is less than one and a half million.
I'd imagined the Telegraph to be considerably higher, don't know why. I was also surprised to see The Guardian as the lowest circulation of all.
In terms of the size of the population, it's true, "nobody" reads the papers anymore, do they.
www.statista.com/statistics/529060/uk-newspaper-market-by-circulation/
Last edited by: Crankcase on Mon 15 Oct 18 at 08:48
|
|
I'd imagine quite a few of some of the titles are complimentary copies given out in hotels, airports etc. I'm pretty sure you can pick up a free Telegraph, Times or Mail at Gatwick,
|
|
I wonder if those figures include ones that are returned due to not being sold?
|
|
My newsagent is reluctant to stock the Telegraph on spec, as the paper does not accept returns and he is likely to get stuck with them. I don't know if this applies to any other papers.
|
www.bbc.com/news/business-45860777
An interview with Steven Armstrong, Chairman & CEO, Ford Europe
Some quotes…
"...... a no-deal outcome would "force us to think about what our future investment strategy for the UK would be".
""...…...would not like to see a Brexit that meant the UK would default to World Trade Organization rules and tariffs. "That would put a significant amount of cost in our business," he said, adding that any additional costs would make the UK less competitive. "It would certainly make us think long and hard about our future investment strategy.""
"Ford's Bridgend plant is losing its contract to supply engines for Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) in 2020, and the plant is seen as vulnerable."
Ironically the two areas likely to suffer are;
Barking & Dagenham - voted 62.4% to leave
Bridgend - voted 54.6% to leave.
[www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028]
Turkeys and Christmas.
Still, probably all just Project Fear right?
And *STILL* people think that leaving with no deal will be just fine.
|
If we leave with no deal I hope the Ford workers in South Wales all lose their jobs because that is what they voted for.
Although he Bridgend plant might be at risk not building JLR engines. Same goes for Dagenham though... diesel engine manufacture?? Thinking about it Ford Bridgend and Dagenham are doomed anyway unless there is demand from elsewhere in the Ford group. Not likely with Brexit is it..
I just think they need to live what they wanted and voted for. Not in the EU and no demand for what they produce.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 15 Oct 18 at 21:01
|
What a sad post. Is that what we have come to, hoping that that those who voted to leave lose their jobs?
I certainly fear for our economic future but I hope for all our sakes that some workable compromise deal is concluded and disruption is kept to a minimum. We truly have become a divided nation.
|
>>What a sad post. Is that what we have come to, hoping that that those who voted to leave lose their jobs?
Either you misread or I wrote carelessly, that was neither what I said nor what I meant.
My point was more to indicate how little thought and understanding was in the original Brexit vote, and how much short-sightedness there still was in whether or not a deal was needed.
EDIT: Sorry, I now see you were not replying to my post. Ho hum.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 15 Oct 18 at 21:24
|
In the Humberside region more shipping I.E.Containers have increased from the continent.If there are going to be problems at Dover regarding customs checks and hold- ups shipping companies are looking ahead.
The problem here in Yorkshire road infrastructure from the Humber ports is poor.How to cope with the increased heavy goods traffic.There has to be a compromise from the E.U and the U.K.
I still see problems in Ireland regarding a open border. Maybe wishful thinking unite that country once and for all.Let the younger generations who maybe not so full of hatred have a say.
|
|
No... if someone have to lose jobs I hope it's those that voted leave. That is different. And take the vote leave percentages in Bridgend and Dagenham as example and many will be directly or indirectly employed by Ford. So if Ford close they have themselves to blame. Quite simple.
|
But my other point seems to have been missed:
1. Ford Bridgend make petrol engines including a contract with JLR expiring in 2020 (so engines stay in the UK before final assembly apart from maybe the ones made in Slovakia but I'm not sure of their engine)
2. Ford Dagengham made diesel engines - many probably for vans but some./many for cars.... diesels are not selling.
So Ford will perhaps close these and blame Brexit. If there's a Brexit deal they might be disappointed!?!?
But I still say if people voted for Brexit and that damages the economy, then if they lose their jobs.... tough luck.
|
"But I still say if people voted for Brexit and that damages the economy, then if they lose their jobs.... tough luck."
It still seem a mean spirited viewpoint to me. Whatever the deal is and whatever the outcome we are all going to have to live with it. Like I said we have become a divided nation but I rather hope that somehow we can be brought back together. If we are going to perpetuate this remain/ leaver divide into the future then there really is no hope
|
>> It still seem a mean spirited viewpoint to me. Whatever the deal is and whatever
>> the outcome we are all going to have to live with it.
It does seem very mean spirited. But at the end of the day, if redundancies are directly caused by Brexit, you cant argue with the fairness of those who caused it get shown the door first.
|
But since you cannot possibly know how people voted or I suspect the real reason why a business closed then we will have to treat everyone equally.
Unless of course we are going to have some sort of inquisiiton.
And should Brexit actually work in some areas and generate some new jobs do we advocate that leavers get first choice?
|
>>if redundancies are directly caused by Brexit, you cant argue with the fairness of those who caused it get shown the door first.
No, I don't agree.
Nobody voted to screw up the UK. Each of us may think that others were more or less right, but nobody wanted to ruin the country. People have to vote according to their own motivations, you can't then punish them if it doesn't turn out well.
If it turns out great will we give those who voted leave an extra bonus? Of course not.
The best people should keep their jobs, irrespective of who voted what, if redundancies become necessary.
The ones who should suffer, if any, are those who lied through their teeth during the campaigning, and knew they were doing so. The behaviour of our politicians throughout the whole process has been shameful pretty much across the board. Some lie, some are incompetent, all are bad at their jobs.
|
>> if redundancies are directly caused by Brexit, you cant argue with the fairness of those who caused it get shown the door first.
Firstly, it is illegal to get rid of people for their political views.
Secondly, how the management would know who voted for leave?
Thirdly, if people are indeed sacked because they voted Brexit, many employees would openly declare that they voted leave and then sue the management (knowing high chance of winning hence hefty compensation) when they are sacked because of that.
So, this will turn more remainers into leavers :o)
|
>> But I still say if people voted for Brexit and that damages the economy, then
>> if they lose their jobs.... tough luck.
Do you think you are being rational? Sounds all emotion to me, and somewhat vindictive.
If collectively we had voted to remain, and the EU were to fall in a heap with disastrous results, would you be to take the blame for the consequences when it happened, perhaps fallen on your sword?
There are lots of moving parts to this. Two years ago the electorate was asked the question. The government proposed the options. All votes were of equal value (and still are). The government has had two years to deal with the result, and the people who voted for it might reasonably have expected it to have dealt with the answer to the question it asked. It might yet, we don't know.
That is even supposing it was the "wrong" result. We may never even know. It might not even matter in the end.
|
>>It might not even matter in the end.
I believe that is correct. I do not think the decision will matter in the end.
I do think that "end" is 10 years of disruption and disadvantage away though.
I also don't think that much will be achieved insofar as all the sovereignty, avoid the EU, international courts and other desires are concerned.
|
I have a client that has said just that. By hook or by crook, if they have to make redundancies it will be the leavers that go first.
.
|
|
A misdirected email, an overheard conversation and your client might find themselves in a little bit of bother.
|
>>I have a client that has said just that. By hook or by crook, if they have to make redundancies it will be the leavers that go first.
That's just wrong.
I would be keeping those best able to keep the company going, not settling personal scores.
If I were a shareholder, someone who has financed the business, or someone otherwise depending on the company I'd want someone prepared to lower it's chances of survival through settling personal scores to be very, very fired.
|
>> If I were a shareholder, someone who has financed the business, or someone otherwise depending
>> on the company I'd want someone prepared to lower it's chances of survival through settling
>> personal scores to be very, very fired.
>>
It's a bit difficult when he's the major shareholder.
BTW, whilst I certainly don't agree with his position, I do understand why he has that viewpoint.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 01:58
|
>>It's a bit difficult when he's the major shareholder.
He has other shareholders, employees, banks, suppliers, customers and they all have families etc. etc.
When you are dealing with people's lives you are supposed to do the best you can. It's an absolute duty.
>> I do understand why he has that viewpoint.
In his personal time, sure, why not. But allowing it to affect work decisions? No, I do not understand nor would I accept it.
|
I have heard more than interview with workers at Nissan's assembly line at factory that could be summarised as:
- Not afraid of Brexit
- We sell lots of cars and we will be fine
What they have not thought of include:
- Nissan are only in Sunderland because the UK is in the EU and the exports are to the EU. Cars for other regions are assembled in those regions.
- Stop selling/exporting to the EU when tariffs apply and there is over capacity in Sunderland Nissan
- The factory is dependent on just in time delivery for components, many of which come from the EU
- Nissan and Renault have a joint venture and so they could move production elsewhere
You get the idea.... so again if jobs are lost in Sunderland (another area voting in the majority to leave) then they get what they voted for.
|
I'm not going to die in a ditch over this. so this'll be my last word on this particular matter.
To treat people professionally dependent upon their political opinion is wrong. Surely you can see where that goes? Blackmail? Retribution? Discrimination? Coercion? Revenge?
It is not professional, it is not moral, it is not honest, it is not decent.
It is fundamentally against everything I believe in.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 15 Oct 18 at 23:52
|
>> It is fundamentally against everything I believe in.
But if we find Ford, Nissan et al reducing jobs (very well paid jobs) and they end up on crap benefits. Some of them voted for it. I have seen interviews with people at Nissan in Sunderland on good wages who voted to leave. As it stands they are at risk if there is no deal.
Do I have sympathy for those? Not really? They might be about to take away things from me as part of the leaving EU process. Is there some emotion in there - you bet. But if they end up without a job that's their doing.
|
|
But there is potentially 5 months to have an election (article 50 would be extended) to get someone else in. Hopefully not Corbyn but if someone said they would remain the the single market then they'd get my vote.
|
People talk of two things;
Second Referendum.:
I think that is wrong and dangerous. Democratically you cannot pick and choose the democratic decisions one abides by and the ones that you do not.
Of course our elected representatives, twits though they are, should have done a better job of framing that referendum. Of course our politicians and representatives should not have lied through their teeth.
But people knew what they were voting for, they voted, and a democratic decision was made.
General Election:
If there was a General Election, if one party said that on election they would reject the referendum decision, would they have another if they were elected?
What if the second decision was no different? And I bet it would hardly change. Perhaps just the other side of the line, but no landslide. Perhaps the same decision. And what then? If we still didn't like the decision would we try again?
In any case, the threshold for a General Election to be forced is very high and quite unlikely.
The following are, and should be regarded as, irrefutable facts;
1) We are leaving;
2) We need a Transition Period
3) We need a lot of new arrangements.
Leaving without a transition period to resolve all matters and no holding/working position would be awful.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:16
|
>> 1) We are leaving;
>> 2)We need a Transition Period
>> 3) We need a lot of new arrangements.
Why can't we say the deal is hard brexit and then we need the transition period??
|
>>Why can't we say the deal is hard brexit and then we need the transition period??
One example, since we already discussed it, what do we do about airplanes? I can only imagine an agreement which says "they continue to flu under current agreement for n years and the agreement must be rearranged in that time".
I cannot think what else can be done. It is not possible to simply stop the current arrangement. Well, it is, but the planes could not land or take-off in an EU country, or in any country where our agreements were part of the EU agreement. 41 countries, I think.
A hard Brexit would mean EU Citizens leaving and UK citizens coming home. I cannot imagine that anybody will allow that to happen, so there will be some kind of arrangement.
Two quick examples which show that a hard exit is not possible in the real world. There are many.
There *must* be a deal with a transition period. The transition period is *FAR* more important than the deal.
Lastly of course, if it is a hard exit, there is no transition period. That's what "Hard Exit" means.
|
>> >>Why can't we say the deal is hard brexit and then we need the transition period??
>> One example, since we already discussed it, what do we do about airplanes
To me hard Brexit is leaving with no deal - what I am saying is what if we leave with no deal so no customs union, etc. but we transition to it. So there is time to sort out whatever is needed for planes to continue flying, larger warehouses for car manufacturers to avoid JiT problems etc.
|
|
At the end of the day the EU and by that I mean Ireland, need to experience a hard brexit, only that will make them see sense and be a lot more flexible over the border thing. Everything else is fixable and flexible.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 08:43
|
>> At the end of the day the EU and by that I mean Ireland, need
>> to experience a hard brexit, only that will make them see sense and be a
>> lot more flexible over the border thing. Everything else is fixable and flexible.
I'm genuinely puzzled as to why you think the issue is 'easy'.
How would you solve it?
|
>> How would you solve it?
I didnt say it was easy, where did you see the word "easy" in my statement?
It is quite easy to make the Irish give way tho.
1/ You want to make our negotiated exit hard because of the border thing? Right OK we go for a hard Brexit and you get the very hard and intractable border back. Your choice.
or we could be nice
2/ We can offer you a hard brexit with no border what so ever except 6 foot wide width restrictions on all paved roads, and WT customs checks at UK/EIre ports. Lets see how long your economy survives with you cut off from the rest of europe.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 12:46
|
>> It is fundamentally against everything I believe in.
It happens in the UK. I was invited to a demo of a recently acquired call centre in Northern Ireland and listened to some of the calls with the proud new multinational owners of the business.
I needed to experience the business and understand how the essential product was being sold so I spent some time listening in to calls.
The call takers in chat with their customers were asking general questions of their Northern Irish customers, like "How are you today Mr X, what's the weather like there, etc.", then later in the conversation, without fail, they would ask what school the person went to.
If it was an orange school they got a price and if it was a green school they got another higher price.
The call desk manager gave me a filthy look when she saw that I had realised what was going on and yes, I did tell the new owners who did sod all about it.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 01:59
|
|
Lots of things happen, doesn't make them right.
|
>> The call takers in chat with their customers were asking general questions of their Northern
>> Irish customers, like "How are you today Mr X, what's the weather like there, etc.",
>> then later in the conversation, without fail, they would ask what school the person went
>> to.
>>
>> If it was an orange school they got a price and if it was a
>> green school they got another higher price.
Their chat sounds very strange to me. Perhaps that's just the way they do things in Northern Ireland?
Q. What's the weather like there?
A. Well, it's raining, you fool! Isn't it raining where you are?
Q. What school did you go to?
A. Do what? Why do want to know that?
Incidentally, isn't it the case that Protestants go to state schools, while Catholics go to church schools.
|
>> Q. What school did you go to?
>>
>> A. Do what? Why do want to know that?
>>
>> Incidentally, isn't it the case that Protestants go to state schools, while Catholics go to
>> church schools.
I'm depressed rather than shocked to hear that sectarianism still affects the provision of goods and services in NI
What is surprising is that Northern Irish person needs to ask about schooling to determine which side of the divide another individual is from. They'd have a damn good idea from names, accents and where people live or say they live; Derry/Londonderry is but one blindingly obvious example.
Would also suspect that management knew damn well what was going on and had recruited exclusively from the Loyalist side.
NI is in west edge of these islands and combines mountains and coasts. The weather in Derry/Londonderry can be very different from Enniskillen and different again in Newry. Good 'icebreaker' question.
|
>
>> If it was an orange school they got a price and if it was a
>> green school they got another higher price.
Thats one of the reasons why it would be nice if, as part of brexit, we could give Northern Ireland to the EU. That would easily be the better deal.
|
|
... but the stumbling block was the same 2 years ago. Nothing new. It was never a last minute problem.
|
|
Ireland is easy. We don't need to have a hard border on our side; what are we afraid of, 2-pin plugs? If the EU want to impose one on their side, then let them.
|
>> Still, probably all just Project Fear right?
In one of your previous posts, you said it is no longer case of whether leaving EU is good or bad but how we leave.
Somewhat contradicting yourself now.
>> An interview with Steven Armstrong, Chairman & CEO, Ford Europe
Whether a company moves out of its operation etc. is determined by a handful of people in executive management.
However, in a vote/referendum all employees (i.e. voters) have a say.
That's why often the views of members of board do not reflect the views of the employees in same organization.
This is the reason why big businesses are predominantly pro-EU because EU means endless supply of cheap labour which is exactly opposite of what most of their employees want.
This is vindicated by this:
UK wages rise faster than expected
www.bbc.com/news/business-45481485
In ideal world employees and management should aim for common benefit but in reality, it is often benefiting one at expense of other.
Now coming back to Brexit, EU is trying to demonstrate that UK would not be in a better position after Brexit to deter others leaving the club.
Many remainers think it is a valid approach by EU.
However, EU could have taken this opportunity to reform itself by understanding why UK wanted to leave. But no, EU can't make any mistakes so it doesn't need to change :-)
>> Ireland is easy. We don't need to have a hard border on our side;
That's my view too. If I keep my front door open and someone enters my house then it is not my neighbor's problem as if he wants he can open his door open or shut. If he argues a burglar came thru my door and jumped over to his garden from my garden, then he can put some spikes in his fence. Similarly, if EU forces Ireland to implement a hard border it is between EU and Ireland to resolve.
In fact, the way EU wanted NI to keep inside SM/CU, UK should counter propose to keep Ireland outside of CU/SM and align itself with UK instead :-)
|
>> This is the reason why big businesses are predominantly pro-EU because EU means endless supply
>> of cheap labour which is exactly opposite of what most of their employees want.
Nonsense. The issue is just in time supply chains (built up over 40years where EU membership was a given) and duty etc when goods cross borders.
In some parts of UK problem is getting any sort of labour!! If they want cheap and it's not coming from EU then they'll get it from India. Their government will demand more flexible immigration as a quid pro quo for a trade deal.
|
>> >> Still, probably all just Project Fear right?
>>
>> In one of your previous posts, you said it is no longer case of whether
>> leaving EU is good or bad but how we leave.
In ALL of my posts for a long time. Do try and keep up.
>> Somewhat contradicting yourself now.
How's that then? Because every time I say we need a deal, someone says we'd be ok with a Hard Exit and how that would 'show them'.
>> This is the reason why big businesses are predominantly pro-EU because EU means endless supply of cheap labour which is exactly opposite of what most of their employees want.
What?? How on earth do you work that out? *THIS* is the reason? What is?
>> However, EU could have taken this opportunity to reform itself by understanding why UK wanted
>> to leave. But no, EU can't make any mistakes so it doesn't need to change
>> :-)
Strange use of smiley.
However, as it happens the last movement of the EU before the referendum WAS propose reform, just not everything the UK wanted and Cameron didn't have, or at least believed he didn't have, the time to negotiate further.
>> Similarly, if EU forces Ireland to implement a hard border it is between
>> EU and Ireland to resolve.
>>
>> In fact, the way EU wanted NI to keep inside SM/CU, UK should counter propose
>> to keep Ireland outside of CU/SM and align itself with UK instead :-)
Another smiley?
It would appears that along with all the other things you don't understand is the history in that area and it's propensity for violence. Peace there was a difficult thing and greatly reduced death and violence. But you think it's just worth a smiley, and then to ignore it as someone else's problem.
I used to get irritated because all your statements came from Red Top Headlines. It would appear that you have even given up reading those.
Have you learned anything from any discussion in here or any post from anybody about anything in the last year?
|
>> What?? How on earth do you work that out? *THIS* is the reason? What is?
Same way remainers have worked out people duped by £350m/week promise and hence Brexit must be cancelled.
|
>> What?? How on earth do you work that out? *THIS* is the reason? What is?
>Same way remainers have worked out people duped by £350m/week promise and hence Brexit >must be cancelled.
You are making no sense at all.
You wrote the following;
Whether a company moves out of its operation etc. is determined by a handful of people in executive management.
However, in a vote/referendum all employees (i.e. voters) have a say.
That's why often the views of members of board do not reflect the views of the employees in same organization.
and then you finished with...
This is the reason why big businesses are predominantly pro-EU because EU means endless supply of cheap labour which is exactly opposite of what most of their employees want.
How on earth does that make any sense at all? It doesn't make enough sense to know whether or not it should be disagreed with or supported!
And then you bring in some tripe about the £350m/week? You are right out of your depth and clearly lost. You should seek to understand a bit more, so far the only person you are impressing is yourself. And I'm not even sure about that.
Having people trailing around with thumbs is not validation. You need to pop back to your little group and get a better briefing. If they are capable of giving it.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 16:14
|
>>This is vindicated by this:
UK wages rise faster than expected
Perhaps you have misunderstood the word "vindicated"? Or perhaps you didn't get past the headlines....
From the BBC....
================
Ben Brettell, senior economist at Hargreaves Lansdown:
"The Bank looks at wage growth as a key driver of inflation.
"The problem is that if wages grow without corresponding productivity growth - as we've seen in the UK - it means more money chasing the same quantity of goods and services, which pushes up prices," he warned.
================
Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics: the latest wage growth rates were unlikely to be maintained.
"The recent pick-up in wage growth has been driven partly by the loosening of the public-sector pay cap for some workers," he said. "For instance, most NHS workers received a pay rise of at least 3% in July.
================
BBC: The fact that 3.1% is the biggest pay rise since February 2009 says more about how weak pay growth has been in the last decade than how strong it has been in the past year. Strip out the effect of inflation (as measured by the Consumer Prices Index) and you get pay growth of just 0.6%.
================
BCC: The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) also said it did not expect this trend to continue.
|
|
We absolutely do need a border. Mandatory if we're on WTO terms.
|
Is there a problem if border checking equipment fails for wrong kind of sun/leaf/air etc.?
Nobody said there would not be any border. It is only how checking would be enforced. Ireland can always enforce a border if they want. UK can do the same.
|
>> Is there a problem if border checking equipment fails for wrong kind of sun/leaf/air etc.?
Same as happens anywhere else when equipment fails. Either nothing moves or stuff moves at pace of fallback. See ATC and fallback to procedural control if IT/radars go down.
>> Nobody said there would not be any border. It is only how checking would be
>> enforced. Ireland can always enforce a border if they want. UK can do the same.
You really, really need to read and understand the history her. Not just 69 on but Cromwell and William III.
|
>>You really, really need to read and understand...……….
Absolutely. And if you do understand, then you'll understand why it is an issue that could blow up in everybody's face.
|
>> Absolutely. And if you do understand, then you'll understand why it is an issue that
>> could blow up in everybody's face.
I thought the phrase 'Cromwell and William III' tripped of the tongue easily.
From Michael Flanders and Donald Swan's 'A Song of Patriotic Prejudice' about how The English are Best and describing the Irish:
They blow up Policemen or so I have heard
And blame it on Cromwell and William the Third
www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vh-wEXvdW8
It dates back to 1964 so before 'The Troubles' blew up again..
|
|
...not only mandatory, but desirable. Without it we can't robustly apply tariffs on EU-sourced goods, a major trade negotiating tool if we are outside any customs/trading bloc with the EU.
|
>> We absolutely do need a border. Mandatory if we're on WTO terms.
Often conveniently ignored. And we would have to apply those tariffs between Ireland and Northern Ireland. No choice.
|
>> Often conveniently ignored. And we would have to apply those tariffs between Ireland and Northern
>> Ireland. No choice.
I was listening to 5 Live's Stephen Nolan on Sunday night. He's not normally my cup of tea - he doesn't seem able to moderate a phone in and ends up with people shouting over each other.
On this occasion though he was with a panel of pro and anti Brexit speakers discussing 'backstop and Irish border. Nolan is an Ulsterman from the Shankhill (well known as a Loyalist/Protestant stronghold). He knows his onions when it comes to matters NI. Brexit spokesman was Conservative MP for NW Leicestershire Andrew Bridgen.
Listen from around 1:48 in......
|
>> Listen from around 1:48 in......
EDIT: Missed copying link:
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0000pvm
|
Aside from the occasional pointless and churlish comment from the reporter, otherwise worth a read and listen.
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45872239
|
Has anyone in this forum switched side since the referendum?
If yes, from what (leave/remain) to what?
|
Most certainly not and I would say the acrimony and the discussions both on here and in the Media have made me all the more determined that I voted the correct way for a better future generation.
Pat
|
>> Most certainly not and I would say the acrimony and the discussions both on here
>> and in the Media have made me all the more determined that I voted the
>> correct way for a better future generation.
Leave may be right or wrong but I don't understand why acrimony on here has any bearing. As Mark has pointed out leavers tend to be bothered about sovereignty and remainers about trade and travel.
They're arguing from different premises.
|
>> Most certainly not and I would say the acrimony and the discussions both on here
>> and in the Media have made me all the more determined that I voted the
>> correct way for a better future generation.
>>
>> Pat
What a completely nonsensical conclusion.
|
>>
>> Pat
Ah, with the sudden crop of frownie faces and thumbs I guessed you were around.
>> I would say the acrimony and the discussions both on here
>> and in the Media have made me all the more determined that I voted the
>> correct way for a better future generation.
Why not? It makes no less sense than any of your other reasons.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 16:15
|
>> Has anyone in this forum switched side since the referendum?
>>
>> If yes, from what (leave/remain) to what?
Certainly not, specially after I found out the vote to leave was based on food and waiter analogies and other logical well reasoned argument.
|
>>Has anyone in this forum switched side since the referendum?
Why does that matter? I wish you'd get it into your skull that the simplistic argument about leave vs remain is not longer relevant.
I know that you are comfortable with it, but it has passed. We *are* leaving, it is a worry about how!
Damn, what does it take for you to understand that?
|
>> Why does that matter?
To estimate how much more amusement I'd get from this thread in future
:-)
:-)
:-)
Added 3 smileys as you don't like smileys =:-o
|
Oh, so you maintain that you're not that ill informed, you are trolling for the laughs.
So your ridiculous conclusions are for your amusement and not even intended for adult discussion, simply to make you laugh?
Well, that certainly puts your posts in context.
Thanks for that.
p.s. I have no feelings about smileys one way or the other, it was your use of them.which previously seemed pathetic, but you've explained that.
Pat and the rest of your little group.must be very proud.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 16:30
|
At least we share the same sense of humour Movi:)
It really is so easy, isn't it?!
Pat
|
Yes, you do. And the same awareness and intelligence.
you have the same understanding on the issues and current events, and a very similar appreciation of the challenges the UK is facing.
Overall, you both represent the same value to this country and this discussion, and will both be of the same amount of use going forward as the country faces it's challenges.
It's just that isn't very much.
And you both sit there feeling smug having nothing of value to say, sneering at the issues and the discussions of those issue. Making your silly statements and then running away when it gets hard to face the questions.
And if to gives you some satisfaction to annoy me, then you should know you annoy me very much indeed. I am sure you are quite well aware of what I think of you, your opinions and your integrity.
What very little people you are.
|
Then I have succeeded in my quest:)
One day Remainers will realise those Brexiteers they sneer at, compartmentalise and have down as being thick as two short planks, just may be a tad more intelligent than they give them credit for:)
Pat
|
|
....is Hell about to freeze over? ;-)
|
Who really thinks that the sovereignty of this country has been compromised whilst in the E.U?
Our politicians make enough mess of the running of this nation without any help from the E.U.
Our chronic affordable housing shortage.Welfare system not working.So many youngsters with a poor education an no hope of a decent well- paid job.
One thing for our future once we are properly left the E.U we can't blame them anymore can we.
|
>>Who really thinks that the sovereignty of this country has been compromised whilst in the E.U?
Many people, Dutchie. My Father for one. And that point is the entire reason he voted to leave and the reason that he now thinks that any compromise or transition agreement is wrong.
He firmly believes that it should all be allowed to crash and burn with a hard exit and then be rebuilt. He genuinely believes, without argument or evidence, that the inevitable suffering and hardship will be worthwhile when the Empire rises from the flames.
He absolutely will not be shifted from that point. He has other unattractive views, also.
But he's my father and a good one and I love him, so what can you do?
|
So to annoy me was your quest? Well then yes, you have succeeded. You often do.
At least you have the sense to choose something that you are capable of and that gives you satisfaction. - Truly a goal worthy of your abilities.
You with your self-satisfied bigotry and ignorance represent so much of what is wrong these days. With your lack of care for the UK and your obsession with getting what you want.
You don't want people speaking foreign languages in your canteen, you're scared of young Indian girls getting health treatment from this country, you are hypocritical and lack any appreciation of the world today, or even the UK's position and role within it.
You may like to say you're more intelligent than I think, but we both know you are *exactly* as intelligent as I think you are. I suspect that's why you are so bitter.
Do you have anything, anything at all to add to the understanding and resolving of the issues of Brexit? Or is it yet again that you can't be bothered, haven't the time, thought it was too late, forgot, or already said it all?
And if you want people to think you are intelligent, if you would like people to think you understand the issues, and if you want people to think you care about the future of the UK, you'd do well to shut up and hope they fall for it.
How do you manage to look in the mirror and remain smug?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 17:06
|
I just think of you Mark:)
Pat
|
>>I just think of you Mark:)
>Pat
Really? You find being ignorant and bigoted to annoy someone on the internet who you don't know and have never met as validation of what you are and your value?
I mean, really?
Dear God, how limited. How very very limited.
|
p.s.
1) I am not a Remainer
2) REMAIN / LEAVE IS NOT THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS *HOW* WE LEAVE.
Like I said, you'd be better to be quiet and hope then open your mouth and ruin any chance.
|
Pedant alert......... that should be THAN not THEN.
Pat
|
Run along, little smug person.
Your group will be very proud of what you have achieved today.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 17:14
|
You, and you alone, have allowed me to achieve that by reacting!
Pat
|
Surely rather the point of a forum? To write and react?
Like your pretence of ignoring me. just an excuse when you can't think of a sensible or valuable reply.
Anyway, I am sure everybody else is bored, we have managed to prove that I am easily annoyed and you have little goals and no idea of the issues.
I cannot imagine that we will ever do better than that.
|
Why are you rowing Pat and Mark.?
You voted Brexit Pat wanted your country back as you say and Immigration controls.
I am not British but I can understand where you coming from.It is our coward politicians who I blame.
Cameron did a runner and Osborne runs a newspaper.Boris pretends to be intelligent just a good showman.All came from the same brainwashed universities how to downtrod on the working classes.
When this exercise goes T up that class will pay for it with job losses.
|
>> Pedant alert......... that should be THAN not THEN.
>>
>> Pat
>>
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=25460&m=561140
|
>>1) I am not a Remainer
Thanks for confirming you are a leaver. At least one forum member changed mind then.
:-)
Last edited by: movilogo on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 19:34
|
>> >>1) I am not a Remainer
>> Thanks for confirming you are a leaver. At least one forum member changed mind then.
>> :-)
You seem to have replied to Dutchie and said this - who were you really replying to?
If you mean Mark then he has accepted we will leave and is concerned about the how. He still thinks we should remain but that ship has sailed and we have to leave and get on with any deals as best we can.
Trouble is Theresa May et al. have proved incapable. And nobody on here has voiced any better ideas.
To use a Dad's Army quote... 'We're all doomed' :-)
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 20:14
|
|
Also you seem to have no idea about how we will leave and the implications on the island of Ireland. Have you read up on the problems there yet to see why a border WILL be a problem? If not go and do some homework please. Perhaps we should send you back to Pakistan or Bangladesh (I think movilogo is from India of course but that might get the Ireland issue across).
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 20:20
|
>> Perhaps we should send you back to Pakistan or Bangladesh (I think movilogo is
>> from India of course but that might get the Ireland issue across).
Exactly. Border sensitivities there, in terms of land claims and nationalities on the 'wrong' side of frontiers are a good primer for understanding Ireland's divides.
|
>> >>1) I am not a Remainer
>>
>> Thanks for confirming you are a leaver. At least one forum member changed mind then.
>>
>> :-)
>>
Oh look, a troll.
Neither did I say I was a leaver. You are the one only capable of understanding two categories.
Rob, he has already admitted he just says these stupid, uneducated things to try and get a laugh. Little or no point in arguing with him and certainly no need to defend me. Though I thank you for the thought.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 20:21
|
>> he has already admitted he just says these stupid, uneducated things to try and
>> get a laugh. Little or no point in arguing with him and certainly no need
>> to defend me. Though I thank you for the thought.
>>
Wasn't there someone else here a while ago that just started silly threads for no reason but to garner a reaction? Total PITA.
|
I doubt they are the same person, Fluffy seemed a somewhat independent, albeit painful, force, Movilogo seems rather more like he is being operated.
However, as you say, both a royal PITA.
On a more general point, I don't really understand how trolling brings satisfaction. It seems a bit like vandalising telephone boxes and feeling good about it.
One wonders how empty one's life, or how small one's penis, must be before trolling makes you feel better about yourself.
|
I thought somebody admitted Fluffy was their sock puppet.
Movi posts some interesting stuff (eg about Indian Railways). I've no common ground with Brexit but even allowing for that I struggle to comprehend some of his analysis/conclusions.
|
Actually the most informative arguments/discussions are typically those with someone who holds an opposing view assuming that they make sense and can be explained. Which rather rules out our two star performers here.
Did someone admit that Fluffy was their puppet? Who was that then?
|
>> Did someone admit that Fluffy was their puppet? Who was that then?
A vague memory.
I may be wrong.
|
Did someone admit that Fluffy was their puppet? Who was that then?
>>
>>
Zero did so, whether he was telling the truth or not i don't know. Either way its odd behaviour.
|
>> Zero did so, whether he was telling the truth or not i don't know.
Thanks for prompting, my recollection is same.
|
>> >> Zero did so, whether he was telling the truth or not i don't know.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for prompting, my recollection is same.
I think it was more of a Spartacus moment.
|
>> I think it was more of a Spartacus moment.
That's what I thought when you posted.
I hope Movilogo likes me comparing the Indian issue with Ireland. Because India used to be one country and now is three. You can blame the British for that I think - as you can for the island of Ireland.
If Movilogo was really someone's alter ego (he's not) then he started it here in March 2010 shortly after this site launched. But they were also on Honestjohn and first posted 3 years earlier than that even. They asked similar questions back then that might annoy some :-) Long time back story for a Brexit character.
e.g. I often hear people say that short journeys are bad for car.
What is the reason behind it? What distance is considered short?
Thanx
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 22:20
|
>> I hope Movilogo likes me comparing the Indian issue with Ireland. Because India used to be one country and now is three. You can blame the British for that I think - as you can for the island of Ireland.
It is not really comparable with Ireland. India has hard border with Pakistan and Bangladesh. In fact border with Pakistant very strictly controlled. Border with Bangladesh is bit porous though - lots of infiltration happens.
I don't blame the British - in fact I respect and appreciate what the British has done for India. The British introduced railways, built infrastructure and taught us English (which made millions of Indians very competitive on global market) and made lives of women better.
If British did not rule India, it would have been ruled by Mughals whose last powerful emperor Aurangzeb was very much anti-Hindu and destroyed lots of Hindu temples. Because of British rule, India still remained a predominantly Hindu nation. Without British rules, India's situation would have been more like Pakistan and Bangladesh and India would not have been a global power.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 17 Oct 18 at 10:36
|
>> Actually the most informative arguments/discussions are typically those with someone who holds an opposing view
>> assuming that they make sense and can be explained. Which rather rules out our two
>> star performers here.
It's difficult to get anyone in general conversation whether 'virtually' here or face to face who can make a positive case for being out.
There's a thread over on Cyclechat.net about benefits of brexit. After 3700 posts we're still looking for the beef....
There was something around the EU being a moribund and outdated concept spelled out by Douglas Carswell on Any Questions that ticked the 'sort of makes sense albeit I disagree box' but I've not heard much else.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 21:53
|
|
Well it looks like Theresa May is taking this to the wire - not looking promising for any sort of deal. Not surprising. But worrying. Does she think the EU will back down at the last minute. Because we all know they will all be lining up to to a deal or two.
|
View of one of nearest we've still got to an elder statesman:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/16/false-promises-brexit-john-major
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 16 Oct 18 at 22:23
|
They are amongst us....
This is just puerile brinkmanship between incompetents.
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45871254
They have a workable approach in principle. Their disagreement is about the fallback position.
The reason? Because if you are ok with the fallback position then you're not going to negotiate very much on the main principle. You will just keep saying "Oh, if you don't agree that request we'll just go for the fallback position"
So each side is determined that the other side must want the fallback position much less so that they can swing their weight around in the negotiations.
F. Idiots.
How about the fall back position is that if final agreement is not reached on the in-principle approach then the negotiators on both sides must all quit and declare bankruptcy?
That'd make them focus.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:15
|
>> This is just puerile brinkmanship between incompetents.
Agree on that. And our position and theirs was always going to be this. But two years ago if we settled for this then people would not be happy. We're not happy now of course! But neither side is going to back down.
At least we have a slim hope of it all going wrong this week and then a few months to agree something really really last minute.
|
"That'd make them focus."
Rich tea, digestive or chocolate?
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:15
|
An Odd Side Effect - Bromptonaut
