Jump to content


Photo

Brexit


  • Please log in to reply
5675 replies to this topic

#21 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0324 AM

 

If you look at Britain since WW2 making a near unerring series of uniquely poor decisions then yes, I think its kind of inevitable we will vote to pull out.

 

As for why, well its a combination of remarkably stupid right wing politicians who are convinced we are still an Empire, economists who will throw everything under the bus to turn London into the next Singapore, and well meaning people who have the naive faith that everything they read in UK newspapers is copper bottomed fact, rather than honey coated bilge from the Murdoch Pravda.

 

Not that the EU has done a particularly great job at welcoming the UK to the EU. In fact you can trace much of the present problem down the self serving prick De Gaulle. It took, what, 15 years to get into the EU? Look at the haste everyone fell over themselves to get Greece in. :D

We initially refused to get involved. We didn't need no steenking continentals! We didn't even attend the meetings that set up the ECSC, despite being invited, & withdrew from the Messina Conference. When the EEC was formed despite our refusal to participate, we tried setting up an alternative, EFTA - but it was damned feeble compared to the EEC. We bit the bullet after a few years & applied to join, but while we'd been dismissing it &  trying to disrupt things de Gaulle had happened, & he didn't want any interference with the nice tidy arrangement he had with West Germany to run the thing.He may also have suspected that our intention was to be a spoiler, after our previous behaviour.

 

From when we first applied to when we joined was 10 years. Before that we'd spent 12 years alternating between ignoring moves towards economic co-operation in Europe & being disruptive.

 

If we'd been in from the start we might have been able to get some improvements, e.g. in the CAP, but by the time of Macmillan's volte-face that was all done & dusted & it was take it or leave it.

 

 

In actual fact we seem to be slap bang between our 2 dates, this states Macmillan applied in 1961, and we got in in 1973, so thats 12 years. Which still seems remarkably tardy, even allowing for Labour not wanting to join, and De Gaulle being an obstructionist prick.

http://www.gresham.a...opean-community

 

And yes, we didnt want to join initially. I think Churchill was one of those who advocated a prototype common market, but didnt believe we should be part of it. That was a major mistake. One only has to look at NATO which we joined on the ground floor and one can see that it is much more akin to what we want and like.

 

But thats by the by. Doesnt it imply that the EU (and I argue we ought to remain part of it) is wholly unable to depart from those founding values established by West Germany and France and the other founding members? We might be a part of the reason for that in our desire for splendid isolation then and now, but that it still is arguably true that the core of the EU make all the major decisions and the rest to a large extent put up with them is still evidently true. Did we get much chance to mould the events of 1992? Because it certainly didnt look like it at the time.

 

That probably comes across at Eurosceptic, and I probably am. I still think we would be soft in the head to leave.


  • 0

#22 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,972 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0520 AM

 

 

 

Greece has beaches, olives, wine, gyros... What do you have? (well, apart from English breakfast ;))


The Tank Museum at Bovington. Surely that's more than enough?

 

Well the Monkey World might be a bigger draw....

 

Infidel!  Burn him! :D

 

 

Mike, you've done it. Infuriating a peaceful Canadian! :D


Edited by sunday, 24 March 2016 - 0520 AM.

  • 0

#23 Ssnake

Ssnake

    Virtual Shiva Beast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,657 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hannover, Germany
  • Interests:Contemporary armor - tactics and technology

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0844 AM

Soo, who's fault is it then that the EU is not more to Britain's liking; an obstructionist conspiracy of the Eurocrats to sabotage British policy change suggestions, ineffectual British diplomacy, or British governments that fail to actually pitch their ideas in Brussels (which might be summarized under the "Diplomacy Fail" case). I'm not suggesting anything. But how comes that France and Germany usually find some common ground to direct the development of the EU while Britain feels left out, even though in 44 years of membership one would expect a nation to figure out how things are getting done in Brussels.

 

Not trying to be smug here; I'm trying to understand if it's the British governments that failed to do their job in the EU, of if it's something else. I don't believe in a conspiracy against Britain. There are a number of "natural allies" on the continent that should provide sufficient leverage in negotiations. Over here the impression is that it's wholly the fault of the UK and their various administrations. The PR that you are generating within the EU is often disastrous and can be summarized as an incurable desire for cherrypicking, the desire to meddle in areas where you don't even participate (e.g. Eurozone meetings), and being doublefaced - on the one hand, agreeing to pretty much everything in the internal negotiations and regulations, but blaming Brussels at home for regulations that were actually started by the British government.


  • 0

#24 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0901 AM

Soo, who's fault is it then that the EU is not more to Britain's liking; an obstructionist conspiracy of the Eurocrats to sabotage British policy change suggestions, ineffectual British diplomacy, or British governments that fail to actually pitch their ideas in Brussels (which might be summarized under the "Diplomacy Fail" case). I'm not suggesting anything. But how comes that France and Germany usually find some common ground to direct the development of the EU while Britain feels left out, even though in 44 years of membership one would expect a nation to figure out how things are getting done in Brussels.

 

Not trying to be smug here; I'm trying to understand if it's the British governments that failed to do their job in the EU, of if it's something else. I don't believe in a conspiracy against Britain. There are a number of "natural allies" on the continent that should provide sufficient leverage in negotiations. Over here the impression is that it's wholly the fault of the UK and their various administrations. The PR that you are generating within the EU is often disastrous and can be summarized as an incurable desire for cherrypicking, the desire to meddle in areas where you don't even participate (e.g. Eurozone meetings), and being doublefaced - on the one hand, agreeing to pretty much everything in the internal negotiations and regulations, but blaming Brussels at home for regulations that were actually started by the British government.

 

You answered your own question Nils. :D

 

Actually Im not suggesting we havent contributed to this situation ourselves, of course we have. We have by turns been overly demanding, and overwhelmingly apathetic. Witness by turns the Thatcher Government which demanded concessions like a birthright, the Major Government which signed up to 1992 with narry a glance or complaint, and the Blair Government which actually (for once) tried to engage with with Europe on something like equality. And latterly the Collation and Cameron Governments which basically turned the clock back to 1979 and pretended we were more important than we were. No joined up policy whatsoever, and all really should view Europe in the same way, ie, its in the national interest.

 

So Im not saying we didnt play a role. But the impression we had from the start is we were in the EEC (and latterly the EU) under sufferance of the landlords, and we had to put up with it. Against any nation that is arrogant, against one that convinced itself it saved the world twice, it was asking for trouble. :D

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

 

 

6 of one and half a dozen of the other in other words. Added to the EU being at beast a monolithic organisation that is incapable of systemic change quickly (as the Germans apparently agree) Im surprised its taken this long to get where we are. Ill be even more astonished if we actually make the right decision, ie to stay in. Fingers crossed.


  • 0

#25 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0931 AM

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.


  • 0

#26 Laser Shark

Laser Shark

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0943 AM

Meh. Leave now or stay for a while longer. It makes little difference. The EU ist ge'effed either way as the age of globalization is nearing its end.


Edited by Laser Shark, 24 March 2016 - 0943 AM.

  • 0

#27 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0944 AM

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 24 March 2016 - 0945 AM.

  • 0

#28 Mikel2

Mikel2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,497 posts

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0949 AM

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

 

You clearly need Donald Trump to negotiate those deals. You can have him. You are welcome.


  • 0

#29 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 0956 AM

 

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

 

You clearly need Donald Trump to negotiate those deals. You can have him. You are welcome.

 

Um. How does no thanks grab you. :D

 

You illustrate another problem with Britains position as the European bridge, Americas estrangement with its oldest allies. That was true during the Bush White house (when lets be fair he did little to endear himself with Europe, or his lack of interest in what Britain thought was a good idea), continued under Obama (like what kind of clueless fuckwit sends a statue of Churchill back?) and if Trump gets to choose the decor in the Oval office looks set to be sealed.

 

There is an excellent chance in the near future that Britain can find itself divorced from the EU, its relationship with the US in shambles, and NATO defunct. God knows the EU is a mess, but its at least a grouping of like minded individuals in uncertain times.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 24 March 2016 - 1002 AM.

  • 0

#30 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1024 AM

 

 

 


 

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.


  • 0

#31 Mike Steele

Mike Steele

    Boobies!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Because, Boobies!

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1028 AM

 

 

,,,

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

Well there is Churchill, and of course ME.......   :D :D :D


  • 0

#32 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1030 AM

 

 

 

 


 

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.

 

Its uncertain how realistic that threat is. Clearly the SNP have made clear they intend to have another referendum if Brexit comes through, and quite possibly next time they will be successful. Whether Westminster will be in a mind to let them, or quite what the effect will be if its denied them, is another matter.

 

Apparently even Eire wants us to stay in the EU. Their cross border trade to Northern Ireland has been quite extensive. The knock on effect that might have to the NI peace process if its curtailed and there is a rise in unemployment must also be considered.

 

There are a lot of points that must be considered. There are no really easy answers here, which is why Im so irritated with the Boris Johnsons and his ilk who all claim its all thought out and not problem at all. They said the same about the return to the gold standard IIRC...

 

I dont think our economy will grow. I think all you will see is Chinese companies buying up British ones and either asset stripping them, or running them into the ground. A prime example of that is MG Rover.


  • 0

#33 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Reading, Berkshire
  • Interests:Too many to list all, but include military, economic &technological history. And cycling.

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1033 AM

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. ...

 

 Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

True - but the Brexit campaigners want at best, 1950s methods, & many seem to prefer 19th century methods. E.g. they argue that the UK (which provides the average other EU member with 6.5% of its imports of goods) is so important to the EU (which provides 47% of the UK's imports of goods) that we could dictate the terms on which we'd trade with it. Doh!

 

The only people who actually understand the UK's relative strength & the clout it would have in the world if it left the EU are campaigning to stay in.


  • 0

#34 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1033 AM

 

 

 

,,,

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

Well there is Churchill, and of course ME.......   :D :D :D

 

Well there are always exceptions....

 

Just kidding Mike, all good examples. :D

 

Lets see,

 

AC Cobra.

The Police (the group, not the doughnut eaters)

Fleetwood Mac

North American Mustang.

B57

Harrier.

M1 Abrams (105mm gun, Chobham armour)

Sacha Baron Cohen?

Jimi Hendrix (alright im stretching the point here a bit)


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 24 March 2016 - 1039 AM.

  • 0

#35 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1048 AM

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium?  Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.


There's your problem right there. ...

 

 Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

True - but the Brexit campaigners want at best, 1950s methods, & many seem to prefer 19th century methods. E.g. they argue that the UK (which provides the average other EU member with 6.5% of its imports of goods) is so important to the EU (which provides 47% of the UK's imports of goods) that we could dictate the terms on which we'd trade with it. Doh!

 

The only people who actually understand the UK's relative strength & the clout it would have in the world if it left the EU are campaigning to stay in.

 

Pretty much actually, yeah.

 

I mean as an emotional decision, I can understand the appeal. To stand on our own feet, unencumbered by red tape, wagging our finger at the Chinese as we used to do 150 years ago. Sure, I get the emotional appeal. But it tends to be promoted by people living in a bubble, surrounded by the old trappings of a defunct empire, in a parliament that looks and acts as if it ought to be in an episode of Wolf Hall. Hey, I like aspects of 'old Britain' But its been European Britain as long as ive been alive, and 'old' Britain was dying on its feet, its the main reason why we were banging on the door to get in.


  • 0

#36 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1134 AM

 

 


 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.

 

Its uncertain how realistic that threat is. Clearly the SNP have made clear they intend to have another referendum if Brexit comes through, and quite possibly next time they will be successful. Whether Westminster will be in a mind to let them, or quite what the effect will be if its denied them, is another matter.

 

Apparently even Eire wants us to stay in the EU. Their cross border trade to Northern Ireland has been quite extensive. The knock on effect that might have to the NI peace process if its curtailed and there is a rise in unemployment must also be considered.

 

There are a lot of points that must be considered. There are no really easy answers here, which is why Im so irritated with the Boris Johnsons and his ilk who all claim its all thought out and not problem at all. They said the same about the return to the gold standard IIRC...

 

I dont think our economy will grow. I think all you will see is Chinese companies buying up British ones and either asset stripping them, or running them into the ground. A prime example of that is MG Rover.

 

 

Boris sure seems confident in being able to quickly establish FTAs after doing a Brexit. But the UK would be negotiating from a weak and vulnerable position, desperate to make deals quickly, so yeah, I think he is wrong to feel confident from my humble observations. And he seems to go on about the EU not being the place of growth in the world, while certainly it is a slow growing region with issues, but has he really giving a proper eye to China? If there was an opportunity to get in, capitalize, and then get out of China while ahead, that boat has already gone. Take a hint from Japan, they're reducing activity in China.

 

And to the bold part, I'm reminded of this article a short while ago.

 

Chinese companies' mergers and acquisitions of Korean firms are rapidly increasing, and their targets include not only manufacturers but service providers, a report said Tuesday.

The Chinese businesses want the technology and other know-how of their Korean partners while the latter seek to advance to the vast Chinese market dodging domestic regulations, said the Institute for International Trade report analyzing China's corporate M&A.

Chinese companies' M&A of Korean businesses totaled 33 last year, three times as many as in 2014. The transaction value also rose 128 percent to $1.93 billion, accounting for 70 percent of the total in the past decade.

Between 2006 and 2014, M&As of manufacturing companies represented 52 percent of the total. Last year, however, services companies, including insurance and entertainment, took up 73 percent of the total.

"To maintain the competitiveness of Korean businesses, the government needs to encourage domestic M&As and to do away with regulations toward that end," the report said.

For instance, the restriction on large businesses' participation in public information business discouraged mergers and acquisitions among software companies, it said. The shutdown system on online games also reduced the domestic market, increasing Korean game developers' dependence on Chinese capital.

"Korean businesses should regard M&As with Chinese businesses not as avoidable, but as a strategy needed for advancing to the Chinese market," the report said. "In this process, the domestic companies need to work out pragmatic M&A strategies to maintain their management basis."

The report said Korean companies need to think about how they could set up joint-venture businesses in China instead of being merged entirely by the Chinese firms.

 

 

http://www.koreatime...123_200394.html


Edited by JasonJ, 24 March 2016 - 1135 AM.

  • 0

#37 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,295 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1139 AM

I'm for staying in. I can see no rational argument for leaving.


  • 0

#38 JW Collins

JW Collins

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1157 AM

Can't you politely ask the Canadians to rejoin the empire and get that up and running again? Everybody knows Canadians cannot refuse a polite request.

No idea how you'll lure the rest back.
  • 0

#39 urbanoid

urbanoid

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,410 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lodz, Poland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1207 PM

Definitely not with their food. :P


  • 0

#40 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 March 2016 - 1215 PM

Definitely not with their food. :P

Whats wrong with faggots and chips? Haggis and Sprouts? Nice bit of black pudding and mushy peas? :)

 

I think the greatest insult is the profusion of Polish food shops we now have in the UK. Whats wrong with when in Rome? :D


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 24 March 2016 - 1216 PM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users