View Full Version : Ole Dave's done it now!
What do all you Eurosceptics think about that?
I think the protection of the City of London is paramount. The Germans would, I'm sure, prefer it to be the City of Bonne!:eek:
I think this could spell the beginning of the end for our time in the EU.
As long as we can maintain a free trade/travel agreement I don't think it's the end of the world.
But if the rest of the EU move away from trading through London, we could be in trouble.
billmoseley
09-Dec-11, 15:46
i think he has done the right thing. Europe is on a downward spiral and i can see it all ending in tears.things might be bad for us for a while but as we have our own currency which other people trust. i think in 10 years time Britain will be doing quite nicely thank you
tonkatojo
09-Dec-11, 15:59
I think this could spell the beginning of the end for our time in the EU.
As long as we can maintain a free /travel agreement I don't think it's the end of the world.
But if the rest of the EU move away from trading through London, we could be in trouble.
I am not clued up enough on this subject but my 5 peneth is if the city keeps its no transaction tax and say the EU introduce a tax it is a no brainer who to deal through, or am I missing something
tonkatojo
09-Dec-11, 16:04
What do all you Eurosceptics think about that?
I think the protection of the City of London is paramount. The Germans would, I'm sure, prefer it to be the City of Bonne!:eek:
Not sure about that but it is time we got a world class manufacturing base going and fast, just think the job scene improving less unemployment benefit kids getting proper apprenticeships and a purpose in life, can't be all but good. Give China and US something to think about, even make good our ties with the Common market as an alternative to Europe.
I am not clued up enough on this subject but my 5 peneth is if the city keeps its no transaction tax and say the EU introduce a tax it is a no brainer who to deal through, or am I missing something
They could just as easily tax EU transactions carried out outside the EU.
Not sure about that but it is time we got a world class manufacturing base going and fast, just think the job scene improving less unemployment benefit kids getting proper apprenticeships and a purpose in life, can't be all but good. Give China and US something to think about, even make good our ties with the Common market as an alternative to Europe.
I'd agree with that.
I worry we've become too reliant on the City.
I believe it will create a two-tiered system with Britain, Hungary etc being on the outside, we've probably upset a lot of allies and trade partners, if the Euro does fail then we're just as screwed. Nevermind though at least we've protected the secret-society-like City of London corporation (seriously everyone should read up on it) and the financial sector that helped cause all these problems to begin with.
All for a financial transaction tax that almost everyone else was willing to accept. Here's the thing if every country institutes a tax then they're hardly going to move out of Europe. Also London perhaps has become too dependant on one industry and the thing they could still institutes this tax.
Edit: Not to mention that he's probably annoyed his coalition partners.
Also regarding a manufacturing economy, the US really has none they're the same as us, it was only former Democratic legislation (Clinton) keeping it there anyway and such a thing will always go to the cheapest country of the moment (Japan, Taiwan, China) because companies want to keep costs low so executives can profit. We shouldn't base our economy too much on one thing, though I would like a robust manufacturing sector.
I feel the need to make this statement in a seperate post:
Basically David Cameron would only agree to it, if his (our) country wasn't held to its terms.
So contribution to UK trade from the Eurozone is 40% and that from City of London is 10%, thanks Dave but you have sold us down the river just to appease your anti EU party members.
I don't think it was much to do with CMD'd chums in the city rather the fact London is a major trade centre and it does contribute to the UK economy, and we do trade outside of the EU (US for one).
Rest assured, if we had taken the hit on that tax then another non EU country would make good efforts to capture the trade.
I believe it will create a two-tiered system with Britain, Hungary etc being on the outside, we've probably upset a lot of allies and trade partners, if the Euro does fail then we're just as screwed. Nevermind though at least we've protected the secret-society-like City of London corporation (seriously everyone should read up on it) and the financial sector that helped cause all these problems to begin with.
All for a financial transaction tax that almost everyone else was willing to accept. Here's the thing if every country institutes a tax then they're hardly going to move out of Europe. Also London perhaps has become too dependant on one industry and the thing they could still institutes this tax.
Edit: Not to mention that he's probably annoyed his coalition partners.
Also regarding a manufacturing economy, the US really has none they're the same as us, it was only former Democratic legislation (Clinton) keeping it there anyway and such a thing will always go to the cheapest country of the moment (Japan, Taiwan, China) because companies want to keep costs low so executives can profit. We shouldn't base our economy too much on one thing, though I would like a robust manufacturing sector.
Real world. The City creates a very large proportion of the countries wealth. That won't change anytime soon. As far as Mfg is concerned yes niche market, High tec R & D, Drug development and a few small specialist engineering areas can be created developed encouraged, but large scale mfg? No. that has always gone where it is cheaper. Before the far east, firms used to mfg in Birmingham then Scotland.
orkneycadian
10-Dec-11, 00:56
So contribution to UK trade from the Eurozone is 40% and that from City of London is 10%
Do you really think that when they are on the bones of their backsides financially, that EU countries will buy products from the UK, when they can get them for a fraction of the price form the far east?
I don't really understand all this. Are you all saying, we are doomed. Should we have let our selves be dictated to, by the Frogs and the Jerries.
I don't really understand all this. Are you all saying, we are doomed. Should we have let our selves be dictated to, by the Frogs and the Jerries.
:eek: OOh PC Alert! I think if Dave came away having signed up to losing more power and influence to Brussells and subjecting business and our own budget setting powers to regulation and foreign scrutiny and potential interference, the press, his own party, the coalition partners, the opposition and ultimately, ourselves, would have crucified him.
Are you all saying, we are doomed.Well, yes! We are all doomed but when we go are we better going with a few pounds in our shroud or euro's?
..[we]..would have crucified him.
He's gonna get crucified anyway, well he should do. Unless of course the euro goes belly up big stylee and the UK cleans up and comes out smelling of roses.
Do you really think that when they are on the bones of their backsides financially, that EU countries will buy products from the UK, when they can get them for a fraction of the price form the far east?
Certainly begs the question why we are there in the first place.
orkneycadian
10-Dec-11, 01:15
I could post a link of a You Tube clip that epitomises what Mr Cameron has said to the other EU countries, but it would probably get me in trouble.
Instead, you could search You Tube for "Braveheart, lord get me out of this mess" and see what you can find.... ;-)
The proportion is a bit higher, 60% of our trade is with the EU. At best David Cameron has inconvenienced the other EU countries, at the worst he's given them a target and hate for that target in the form on the City of London and its financial industries.
Edit: After considering it a bit more, what I think happened was that Cameron threatened to veto as - many PMs before him had. Hoping to get a concession or something he could come back to the Euro-sceptics with. This time however they called his bluff and so he had two options, back down and been laughed it or veto it and engender some hate and he choose the latter.
The proportion is a bit higher, 60% of our trade is with the EU. At best David Cameron has inconvenienced the other EU countries, at the worst he's given them a target and hate for that target in the form on the City of London and its financial industries.
I'm not sure of these percentages and proportions. What you are measuring, income (revenue) or volume of goods? I do know that one international Bond Trader probably contributes more than say 100 farmers.
Curious.
Where are these trade figures coming from and are they specifically relating to trade manufactured / serviced / delivered directly from the UK?
EDIT: Just a quick look at some figures and it appears we (the UK) imported £150,799 Million from the EU and exported £118,196.7M. (YTD)
Interesting!
John Little
10-Dec-11, 08:34
I'm not sure of these percentages and proportions. What you are measuring, income (revenue) or volume of goods? I do know that one international Bond Trader probably contributes more than say 100 farmers.
I'm with the farmers then - you can't eat bonds.
John Little
10-Dec-11, 08:50
I don't really understand all this. Are you all saying, we are doomed. Should we have let our selves be dictated to, by the Frogs and the Jerries.
It ain't about that Shazz.
The financial collapse in world banking - and indeed in the Euro- was largely caused by de-regulation of the markets which fuelled huge amounts of speculative investment. For example in 'Futures'. People buying up the 2015 orange crop in expectation of making a vast profit - gambling. But worse - using their expected profits to gamble again etc etc. In other words a vast mountain of money that never existed; it was expected to exist. Panic set in when investors realised that actually it was not ever going to exist; they began selling shares as fast as possible to get some 'real' money before all went pear shaped.
The Euro zone knows this and they wish to stabilise the situation by bringing in a very tight set of rules and measures which will effectively bring an end to the irresponsible gambling and speculation, keeping it in reasonable limits.
David Cameron does not want that - he likes the idea of a free financial market. So the British financial sector will not be so heavily regulated as the European one- you will still be able to speculate fairly wildly and make vast profits if it pays off. European investors who want to speculate will probably pour cash into the City of London- and therefore out of Europe- because of the possible profits. We will become a sort of casino off the coast of Europe where, if you strike lucky then you can get very rich indeed,
On the other hand you will also be subject to huge losses- and far more vulnerable to future crashes.
And our economy will continue to be heavily dependent on the City of London; there will be little incentive to invest in our own manufacturing centre or our own people. The City of London will invest the cash they get in cheap labour like China and India etc.
They will then support the resulting unemployed population in Britain by paying a thin dole from their profits whilst at the same time accusing them all of being wasters and scroungers through their press.
In other words - more of same.
Thanks a lot Dave.
tonkatojo
10-Dec-11, 09:42
The proportion is a bit higher, 60% of our trade is with the EU. At best David Cameron has inconvenienced the other EU countries, at the worst he's given them a target and hate for that target in the form on the City of London and its financial industries.
Edit: After considering it a bit more, what I think happened was that Cameron threatened to veto as - many PMs before him had. Hoping to get a concession or something he could come back to the Euro-sceptics with. This time however they called his bluff and so he had two options, back down and been laughed it or veto it and engender some hate and he choose the latter.
That policy (hate) has been going on long enough with the French and the hate of Estonia was all to apparent yesterday, did anyone not notice that blonde woman booking a hotel with Sarkozy and her obvious glee of Camerons predicament.
tonkatojo
10-Dec-11, 09:44
I'm not sure of these percentages and proportions. What you are measuring, income (revenue) or volume of goods? I do know that one international Bond Trader probably contributes more than say 100 farmers.
I thought the figure bandied around was 40%.
tonkatojo
10-Dec-11, 09:47
I'm with the farmers then - you can't eat bonds.
If the CAP goes belly up watch the French and the next revolution within days, can anyone tell me our contribution in £s IE: ? billions we pay into Europe and what 40% of our exports to them equate to in cash.
It ain't about that Shazz.
The Euro zone knows this and they wish to stabilise the situation by bringing in a very tight set of rules and measures which will effectively bring an end to the irresponsible gambling and speculation, keeping it in reasonable limits.
What it would have brought to an end (over time) would have been the City as a world financial services centre.
You are making up your own reasons for the financial crash, to suit your agenda.
The problem started with the so called credit crunch. This was the Banks lending injudiciously, to consumers and business then, selling these worthless debts to each others as Kosher. There then followed a period of mistrust that resulted in the credit supply drying up exposing an under-capitalisation position with many banks that had been concealed by the previous free flow of credit.
In other words the Banks ran out of money.
John Little
10-Dec-11, 10:21
And why was that?
John Little
10-Dec-11, 10:24
Being a world class financial centre is not hard. All you have to do is deregulate to the minimum and allow barrow boys like Nick Leeson almost complete free rein and the money will flood in.
Other places do it - Ireland, Iceland, Lichtenstein...
But it does not particularly benefit most people in this country. Except to pay their dole.
But it does not particularly benefit most people in this country. Except to pay their dole.
Well and every other benefit and the Health Service and all the Public Sector workers and Teachers and Doctors and everything else. It is just money it is not EVIL!
Surely all forms of income to a country that needs lots of it is equal. You are starting to sound like some kind of Hippy!
But it does not particularly benefit most people in this country. Except to pay their dole.But doesn't it ease the burden on the rest of us taxpayers? Do you really want to throw away £53.4billion of UK tax revenue? (North Sea Oil generates £13b there's not much else to try and plug the gap)
With a straight face, a stunted Gallic egomanic performs a flounce worthy of the Folies Bergeres on his dear little platform shoes, and pipes up to a waiting press throng that a hugely successful and historic treaty has been agreed, thanks to his earnest coupling with that appallingly-trousered whey-faced bag lady who gives the former East Germany a bad name. From now on, members of the Euroclub (everyone except UK) will hand over some sovereignty and have their accounts and budgets approved by Brussels before implementation.
To me, that sounds as if Brussels can tell individual nations what Brussels would PREFER each country to prioritise. Otherwise - no approval. It's already clear that Brussels is determining who is fit to govern in each of its affiliates: democratic will is subservient to the introduction of "approved techno-economists".
If any country defaults on this, or its delivery to cost of such budgets, it will be hauled up before Brussels and PUNISHED.
What punishment, or sanction is there? Except a fine, as you can't put a country in prison.
So Brussels fines the country for having spent too much.
How will it pay the fine?
By paying out more of its sovereign wealth........
And this from the European Union, whose budgets and accounts have not been approved, cleared or balanced for over a decade, and whose working practices would bring a chuckle of recognition from Oscar Wilde, King Farouk, Caligula, and Messrs. Micawber and Creosote.
UK plc is well out of this shambles. There will be little joy in watching the death throes of the Euro, but a lot of mileage in strengthening more global aspirations, operating through a well-chastened but forward looking world financial centre based in London which speaks to the world in English, NOT in any other bit of parochial Jabberwock. Any country (no names, no pack drill) whose imagination and culture allows its language to be polluted by expressions like "le weekend" and "le hot dog" deserves what it gets. As does the language of the other half of this unlovely duo, who have to resort to such euphonies as "Fernsehbildschirm" when what they mean is "TV screen".
(I was thinking of changing my name to Zen O'Phobe!)
John Little
10-Dec-11, 13:18
Well and every other benefit and the Health Service and all the Public Sector workers and Teachers and Doctors and everything else. It is just money it is not EVIL!
Surely all forms of income to a country that needs lots of it is equal. You are starting to sound like some kind of Hippy!
Labels! The income you are speaking of leads to a society with an uneven distribution of wealth that is so unbalanced that it actually leads, in the end, to another bust. I am emailing you a powerpoint...
John Little
10-Dec-11, 13:36
Okay guys. Don't argue with me please.
Argue with this instead.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/dec/09/eurozone-treaty-uk-veto-cameron-video
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 13:49
I think this is just rank hypocrisy from many members of thsi forum and they probably arent even aware they are doing it.
Many on here have called for greater regualtion and taxes on financial services after the credit crunch.
David Cameron (yes that one) has vetoed a EU treaty over its desire to impose a European wide financial transaction tax on things like banks.
He has effectivly done what many on here dont want him to do, but is now being praised for it.
Thats realpolitik.....or hypocrisy.
Many on here have called for greater regualtion and taxes on financial services after the credit crunch.But don't you think that should be decided upon, imposed by and collected for the UK? And not to punish the UK to support the corrupt agencies of the likes of Greece et al?
To me, that sounds as if Brussels can tell individual nations what Brussels would PREFER each country to prioritise. Otherwise - no approval. It's already clear that Brussels is determining who is fit to govern in each of its affiliates: democratic will is subservient to the introduction of "approved techno-economists".
If any country defaults on this, or its delivery to cost of such budgets, it will be hauled up before Brussels and PUNISHED.
What punishment, or sanction is there? Except a fine, as you can't put a country in prison.
So Brussels fines the country for having spent too much.
How will it pay the fine?
By paying out more of its sovereign wealth........Absolutely. Trade agreements, travel areas are one thing. Undemocratic rule from Brussels is another.
John Little
10-Dec-11, 14:27
We joined a club.
We don't like the rules.
Logical outcome?
tonkatojo
10-Dec-11, 14:34
We joined a club.
We don't like the rules.
Logical outcome?
Not sure John, the original club was fine, it is all the add ons since what are the problem.
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 14:46
No but John we do like the rules, infact we bloody love the rules. Unfrotunately nationalistsic nonsense gets in the way of thinking clearly, as it usually does. The EU has done soooo much for Europe, like the little fact the economic integration it has brought has stopped a war being fought in Europe for 70 years. Or the reality of freedom of services and trade accross borders. Its enabled things like Lidl to comes to this town and emplot alot of people.
No one ever gives the EU the credit it deserves. Ever. They bang on about "rule from brussels" despite the immense benefits its brought. Just ask many of the "eurosceptics" to name, in detail, what they hate about Europe adn they just mumble and moan without a clue of any specific examples other than we are colluding with foreigners and thats wrong...........whilst dressed head to toe in clothes made and branded on foreign shores and eating food from bloody Alaska!
When i say I cannot wait for the current genenration brought up on war stories to just off I aint lying. We no longer view the Germans as a threat, or the think the French are trying to take over our country, we view them as places of opportunity and where we might learn something about balancing a budget or gain some ideas of what to do with sausages at dinner time!
Infact, and this may be taken any way you wish, many of the peoples in this country have such a simplistci view of Europe its akin to the day someone tried to explain the Dubya that there are Sunni's and Shias. He just didnt get it.
We are in a global economy and we need to trade with countries around the globe. I don't think anyone is saying we close Lidl's or wage war on France (not yet anyway :) ) But just retain a certain amount of control over our budgets, taxation and laws. Is that a bad thing? It seems strange that while some in Scotland want independence from the Inglish / Westminster others (maybe some of the same) want to hand everything to Brussels.
John Little
10-Dec-11, 15:27
Blimey Weezer! :eek:
I agree with every single word you just said :eek:
Does this mean you are a Hippy too?
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 15:38
Phil,
Please read. Its extensive and thats the point. The foreword even mentions that in a survey 30% havent a clue what the EU is or does.
http://ec.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/pdf/webversion.pdf
Im curious, what exactly dont you like about the EU?
Phil,
Please read. Its extensive and thats the point. The foreword even mentions that in a survey 30% havent a clue what the EU is or does.
http://ec.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/pdf/webversion.pdf
Im curious, what exactly dont you like about the EU?
Who do we believe?? That is just some one else giving an opinion, thier version/take on things. Like the people on here. I just can't see what is right about other countries, forcing thier, rules/opinions/laws. Or what ever else, onto the UK. Surely we can govern ourselves.
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 15:53
Omg! Shazzap please!! This is the sort of nonsense and unthinkning propoganda thats at the heart of the issue. I strongly suggest you read the PDF I linked too. Its very revealing.
Furthermore, its not "other countries" its other countries and US seeing as we have a fairly sizable seciton of the EU parliment. Its about doing whats in the common good. Things like ensuring your rights are protected abroad when you need medical help/buy a product/wish to travel or that your rights here conform with a continental standard and that the UK govt doesnt decide you suddenly have less rights than a frenchman or german or any other nationality here.
Can I please ask for some examples of what has been forced down our throats and that has harmed the UK and more importantly you? Please, I beg of you. If it involves bananas then you need to lok harder.
Omg! Shazzap please!! This is the sort of nonsense and unthinkning propoganda thats at the heart of the issue. I strongly suggest you read the PDF I linked too. Its very revealing.
Furthermore, its not "other countries" its other countries and US seeing as we have a fairly sizable seciton of the EU parliment. Its about doing whats in the common good. Things like ensuring your rights are protected abroad when you need medical help/buy a product/wish to travel or that your rights here conform with a continental standard and that the UK govt doesnt decide you suddenly have less rights than a frenchman or german or any other nationality here.
Can I please ask for some examples of what has been forced down our throats and that has harmed the UK and more importantly you? Please, I beg of you. If it involves bananas then you need to lok harder.
OMG w316. Get off your soap box. I was, if you look, asking a question. Also i TO have a right to an opinion, you come across very hostile and arrogent. I also believe, the Uk goverment have already decided we have less rights. I myself prefer to debate about Blue berries.
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 16:07
Ok well Im sorry if thats how it comes accross, but please can you furnish we with examples of the behaviour you so despise please? Pretty please?
For Gods Sake, no-one call John a Hippy :eek:
For Gods Sake, no-one call John a Hippy :eek:
John Little is a Hippy!!!!
How's that Duke?
C3..............:roll:;)
John Little
10-Dec-11, 19:37
Duke thinks you are a Hippy if you point out that there an imbalance of wealth in our economy and that this is not particularly healthy or beneficial to society as a whole.
Duke thinks you are a Hippy if you point out that there an imbalance of wealth in our economy and that this is not particularly healthy or beneficial to society as a whole.
I'm a Hippy too then John ?
It could be worse I suppose, I could be a Tory!!
C3......................:roll:;)
weezer 316
10-Dec-11, 20:16
You are a tory!!!
Anyone got an example of this Euro legislation they keep talking about then? Anybody? Anybody at all
John Little
10-Dec-11, 20:23
The fact is Weezer that there is no measure ever taken by the European Parliament that has not been sanctioned by the British Parliament, either by our signing treaties or by legislation.
Not one - you are correct.
It could be worse I suppose, I could be a Tory!! C3......................:roll:;)
Your a Tartan Tory, Eck is fooling you [lol]
Imbalance, the question is how do you change it? It's alright complaining that some make too much money but that isn't very helpful.
My take on it is, if you want more money, do something about it yourself. There are plenty of jobs in the City of London. It isn't a closed shop. Anyone with a reasonable education, is numerate and literate can be taken on and trained. Better make sure you make plenty though, it can be a very short career. You don't even have to move to London, there are dealing floors in most major cities, Edinburgh and Glasgow for instance.
What isn't going to happen is truckloads of money arriving in Caithness. So it is no good sitting on your butt complaining, you have to go looking.
Imbalance, the question is how do you change it? It's alright complaining that some make too much money but that isn't very helpful.
My take on it is, if you want more money, do something about it yourself. There are plenty of jobs in the City of London. It isn't a closed shop. Anyone with a reasonable education, is numerate and literate can be taken on and trained. Better make sure you make plenty though, it can be a very short career. You don't even have to move to London, there are dealing floors in most major cities, Edinburgh and Glasgow for instance.
What isn't going to happen is truckloads of money arriving in Caithness. So it is no good sitting on your butt complaining, you have to go looking.
I think your outlook is all wrong Duke, people don't want shed loads of money, some do of course but they are the greedy ones. All people want is a level playing field in the money stakes. I don't mind or envy people who make £millions each year, good luck to them. What I do object to is people who through no fault of their own are being denied basic things like heat and fuel, cancer pills on the NHS, a roof over their heads, etc, etc. The lucky ones who make the millions can still have a good life but put a bit of their wealth towards those less fortunate. And your advice is false Duke, we cant all work in the City can we?
C3..................:roll::roll:
I think your outlook is all wrong Duke, people don't want shed loads of money, some do of course but they are the greedy ones. All people want is a level playing field in the money stakes. I don't mind or envy people who make £millions each year, good luck to them. What I do object to is people who through no fault of their own are being denied basic things like heat and fuel, cancer pills on the NHS, a roof over their heads, etc, etc. The lucky ones who make the millions can still have a good life but put a bit of their wealth towards those less fortunate. And your advice is false Duke, we cant all work in the City can we?
C3..................:roll::roll:
You can't if you don't try.
This wealth thing is much more fundamental than a bit more tax. JL wants to tear down the entire establishment and start again. I think you could, but you'd be starting in the middle ages.
Anyway, back to the thread. Did Dave do the right thing in your opinion or could he never do anything right because he is a Tory?
John Little
10-Dec-11, 21:00
Imbalance, the question is how do you change it? It's alright complaining that some make too much money but that isn't very helpful.
My take on it is, if you want more money, do something about it yourself. There are plenty of jobs in the City of London. It isn't a closed shop. Anyone with a reasonable education, is numerate and literate can be taken on and trained. Better make sure you make plenty though, it can be a very short career. You don't even have to move to London, there are dealing floors in most major cities, Edinburgh and Glasgow for instance.
What isn't going to happen is truckloads of money arriving in Caithness. So it is no good sitting on your butt complaining, you have to go looking.
I do not think you quite understand what I am saying.
Money controls all.
If money from here can be invested by the billion in American sub primes then why could it not be invested in British Industry and jobs?
Why does the regulatory system allow banks and stockbrokers to invest such large amounts of national resource without inadequate safeguard?
I have known several city 'players'. One is on my facebook list; he will tell you straight that it's ridiculous money he gets for what he does. It's a dog eat dog world where feeling does not count, humans disappear under balance sheets - and after the age of 30 you are big zero. Last year about 2500 bankers earned a million in bonus. Earned?
Do me a favour.
What is money for? What is its purpose?
What is civilisation and how do we define it?
To me, money is a medium of exchange. If its function is to perpetuate privilege for a select elite, then it is a parasite.
If its function is to reflect and reward true effort and commitment to society, then it is failing.
If the current system of regulation and taxes is biased to channel capital in a certain way, then a changed system of taxation and regulation can spread it more evenly.
It is all a question of will and intent.
Another thing you don't get is that we are already back in the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages wealth was controlled by a privileged aristocratic elite who owned everything. Today it is the Robber Barons of the City who fill that place.
Where do you think those £ million bonuses come from Duke? It ain't thin air!
It's your pocket!!!!
I do not think you quite understand what I am saying.
Money controls all.
If money from here can be invested by the billion in American sub primes then why could it not be invested in British Industry and jobs?
Why does the regulatory system allow banks and stockbrokers to invest such large amounts of national resource without inadequate safeguard?
I have known several city 'players'. One is on my facebook list; he will tell you straight that it's ridiculous money he gets for what he does. It's a dog eat dog world where feeling does not count, humans disappear under balance sheets - and after the age of 30 you are big zero. Last year about 2500 bankers earned a million in bonus. Earned?
Do me a favour.
What is money for? What is its purpose?
What is civilisation and how do we define it?
To me, money is a medium of exchange. If its function is to perpetuate privilege for a select elite, then it is a parasite.
If its function is to reflect and reward true effort and commitment to society, then it is failing.
If the current system of regulation and taxes is biased to channel capital in a certain way, then a changed system of taxation and regulation can spread it more evenly.
It is all a question of will and intent.
I don't disagree, except that investers invest in what they think they will get a return from. And don't forget, a large proportion of the investers are working on behalf of pension funds so they are not crazed risk takers.
Certainly, very few people will invest their own money (if they need a return) in projects that don't make money.
But just to be clear, I'm not disagreeing.
last time I got ejucated with 27 slides :eek:
I just want to be happy.:lol:
I just want to be happy.:lol:
No chance of that while the Tory's are in power Shazz !!!!
"Misery to the millions" should be their motto!!!
C3.......................:roll:;)
No chance of that while the Tory's are in power Shazz !!!!
"Misery to the millions" should be their motto!!!
C3.......................:roll:;)
They all pee, in the same pot.
They all pee, in the same pot.
Aye, but to some it's a gold pot and to others it's a plastic pot!!!!
C3............:roll:;)
Phil,
Please read. Its extensive and thats the point. The foreword even mentions that in a survey 30% havent a clue what the EU is or does.
http://ec.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/pdf/webversion.pdf
Im curious, what exactly dont you like about the EU?
I'm surprised it's only 30% !!
TBH, that document is more propaganda than informative. Reads all nice an' glossy like!
But, don't get me wrong. There are lots of good things about the EU and I do believe that there is scope for us to be part of the EU.
I don't believe we, or any other member state, needs to hand over total control though.
Having trade, immigration & travel agreements in place, a basic framework for legislation and a financial / budgetary targets to sit within would be fine. To dictate specific parameters across all states with no flexibility for local issues is, in my opinion, unfair and undemocratic.
What I don't like about the EU is actually a British problem. We, the UK, accept whatever regulations that are dished out by the commissioners and apply them to the UK and the populace as we are good at bureaucracy, pointless rule enforcement and doing things because that is what the 'rules say'. Other member states just choose what regulations suit them to enforce.
Also the framework for regulation in the EU is far from perfect and is too EU centric, it excludes in some areas how any member state deals with and interacts with non EU states.
What we need to remember is we trade with the rest of the world too, we need to control how we do that, not Brussels.
There are too many, wide variances across the EU in many areas to make things 'fair'.
I think the EU would need another decade at least for all member states to align their legislation, policies and financial systems in a truly uniformed manner. Until then I would not hand over total control to a group we cannot easily call to account and voice our opinions too.
weezer 316
11-Dec-11, 00:30
John,
In one sentence, if i was to say the following do you feel it would be accurately on your position?
The adversarial market doesnt accurately represent the true worth to society of the each individual, with some earning far more and some far less.
If thast the case then I agree, but having the market decide the wages of individuals is i feel the only real way to do it. Otherwise things fall prey to loud lobbies and thats a far worse position.
I do declare the thought process on here seems...Blame everyone else, but oneself...
Gawd there must be a lot of bad people in this world....
Cloud Puncher
11-Dec-11, 04:37
No but John we do like the rules, infact we bloody love the rules. Unfrotunately nationalistsic nonsense gets in the way of thinking clearly, as it usually does. The EU has done soooo much for Europe, like the little fact the economic integration it has brought has stopped a war being fought in Europe for 70 years. Or the reality of freedom of services and trade accross borders. Its enabled things like Lidl to comes to this town and emplot alot of people.
No one ever gives the EU the credit it deserves. Ever. They bang on about "rule from brussels" despite the immense benefits its brought. Just ask many of the "eurosceptics" to name, in detail, what they hate about Europe adn they just mumble and moan without a clue of any specific examples other than we are colluding with foreigners and thats wrong...........whilst dressed head to toe in clothes made and branded on foreign shores and eating food from bloody Alaska!
When i say I cannot wait for the current genenration brought up on war stories to just off I aint lying. We no longer view the Germans as a threat, or the think the French are trying to take over our country, we view them as places of opportunity and where we might learn something about balancing a budget or gain some ideas of what to do with sausages at dinner time!
Infact, and this may be taken any way you wish, many of the peoples in this country have such a simplistci view of Europe its akin to the day someone tried to explain the Dubya that there are Sunni's and Shias. He just didnt get it.
Do us a favour. Do you sit all day with your tongue running up and down the window ??, ever stop to think that perhaps you are thicker than a whale omelette ??, because you are. Are you saying that one of the EU's crowning glories is allowing LIDL to open some shops. Because, and you might want to huddle in for this one, that's called free
trade, which funnily enough is what the EU started out as in the Common Market. And I am fairly certain that existed long before the EU. Yes, it did.
As for Euro-sceptics out there, of which I am one, you state of the "enormous benefit" of the EU, without naming ONE while justifying your argument by labelling us of "mumbling and moaning without a clue of any specific examples" while dressed in head to toe of clothes made and branded on foreign shores and eating food from "bloody Alaska", I really think you should prise your tongue away from the window and grow a brain cell or two.
Lets look at what I am unhappy about with the EU.
1 .. The fact that I am now deemed a citizen of Europe without my consent.
2 .. The fact that I have to pay for this overgrown behemoth.
3 .. The fact that an unelected body can pass laws that overrides the Parliament I voted for.
4 .. The fact that when the EU gets a vote they don't like, they just keep doing it until the people get it right in their view. Ireland anyone ??
5 .. The fact that EU Human Rights laws mean that we cant deport scum because they have a cat or a family. Despite them killing people or denying others the rights they hide behind.
6 .. The fact that despite us having to bail out the Euro as an EU state we are told by the German's and their French Poodle Sarkozy that we have no right to influence the Eurozone. I am waiting for Merkel to stand up and say "Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Euro" .. it would be more honest.
7 .. The fact that the EU has, in the guise of the German and French Governments, imposed an unelected and EU acceptable administration in the governments of Greece and Italy. And weren't there major doubts at the time about Greece being able to meet the criteria of EU membership which are now all to fricking plain .. take a close look genius, they are bankrupt.
8 .. They tried to stop Irn Bru.
9 .. See point 8.
10 .. Norway is a non EU oil producing nation, they seem to be doing alright without having to prop up all the leeches of Europe.
Oh and by the way, before lecturing others you might want to check your spelling and punctuation. Because it looks like Stevie Wonder typed it while high on crack. And only a grade A idiot would not view the posturing by the German's and the French regarding the financial transaction tax, that would directly affect the City of London, as nothing to worry about in the terms you described.
I honestly find it difficult to believe you can be this thick without help.
John Little
11-Dec-11, 08:16
John,
In one sentence, if i was to say the following do you feel it would be accurately on your position?
The adversarial market doesnt accurately represent the true worth to society of the each individual, with some earning far more and some far less.
If thast the case then I agree, but having the market decide the wages of individuals is i feel the only real way to do it. Otherwise things fall prey to loud lobbies and thats a far worse position.
Insert the word 'regulated' before the word 'market' in your third sentence and I am in perfect agreement with you.
I will leave answering the above to you because I am deeply engaged in another thread- but I reiterate that Europe does absolutely nothing that has not been consented to by our elected representatives.
If people in this country are unhappy with the EU then they need to press their MPs to repeal the European Communities Act of 1972 and begin the process of disengaging from Europe. We do retain our sovereignty though some of it is lent elsewhere.
But I don't think our MPs would agree.
The EU was a good place, once, problem is they let all the poor countries in that couldn't afford to pay the fees, etc, they have dragged the EU down. I think its a good thing we are pushed to the side. Lets leave the EU and let them struggle over there finances themselves, How much is it to b in the EU 32 billion a year
isnt it. Smaller and poorer countries pay less.............. why?
John Little
11-Dec-11, 11:12
Lots of interesting comments from the great and good after this article;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-eu-leaves-britain-6275034.html?fb_action_ids=10150410232171114%2C101 50522235221271%2C10150413324182001%2C1015052201772 3478%2C10150522237751271&fb_action_types=news.reads&fb_ref=U-Go2s1dwJl0854nLvIfDtNf-CFCONX01FRS-2j6gkXXX%2CU-7sFpoCkCVLB14WPQK4QpNw-CFCONX01FRS-2j6gkXXX&fb_source=other_multiline#access_token=AAADWQ6323I oBAO8eZCDr01NduPrzpSnDn3mywaP3Tq66RHoeHMGiW2QF7I6t eRBzXfQAWfAW5sllXbTAUxgFYrKwAUItdJpcuZBXUb6gZDZD&expires_in=6634
I had to give a snort of derision when I heard that eurozone countries would have their budgets inspected by Bruxelles and could be penalised if they were thought to be out of line.
If countries had been properly scrutinised when they were allowed to join the single currency then the euro would not be in the mess it is now as several did not come any where near the criteria.
I also wonder whether with the current feeling that capitalism needs to change whether the population of various countries will meekly accept what their politicians are so ready to sign up to.
Having seen over the years the wasted monies, corruption , theft,misuse of funds I don't see tightening the regulations will have much effect unless the beaurocrats are held personally accountable but as they are not elected that cannot happen.
What does concern me is the complete lack of action on a problem that could plunge the world into an even deaper recession.
Very interesting (and some barmy) comments. All seem to have missed the point. If ole dave had signed up to a new treaty it would (now) automatically trigger a referendum that, judging by the mood in the country, would have lead to the UK leaving the EEC.
So, like it or not (Mr Clegg) he has saved the UK in Europe and probably saved Europe too..
You might well be right, I'm on a couple of National surveys, and had two the day Dave did his stand up routine, expect those results to be posted anytime now..
The fact is Weezer that there is no measure ever taken by the European Parliament that has not been sanctioned by the British Parliament, either by our signing treaties or by legislation.
........ Europe does absolutely nothing that has not been consented to by our elected representatives. That makes it all sound very democratic, as if we individually have a say in how our country is run (from Brussels). The reality is, if we don't realign our laws to those of the EU regs we get slung out, or sidelined, or marginalised.
They are sanctioned because they have to be, not through a truly democratic process.
Having seen over the years the wasted monies, corruption , theft,misuse of funds I don't see tightening the regulations will have much effect unless the beaurocrats are held personally accountable but as they are not elected that cannot happen.Unfortunately where there's public money and power by way of officialdom, there will be corruption. Even at local level within NHS, Councils. Regional & national Govt.
And European level. Now that's the problem, if it's to be fair and equitable, everyone needs to be corrupt in the same things, if not, it makes for a very unfair Europe.
Very interesting (and some barmy) comments. All seem to have missed the point. If ole dave had signed up to a new treaty it would (now) automatically trigger a referendum that, judging by the mood in the country, would have lead to the UK leaving the EEC.
Maybe. But CMD failed spectacularly in the area known as negotiation as far as I can see.
We need the EU, we need to be part of it. But I don't believe we, or any other member state, needs to hand over so much control nor sit within such tight regulations.
The reg's get interpreted differently state by state anyway and then just plain ignored in some cases if it doesn't suit, so why bother.
tonkatojo
11-Dec-11, 15:40
You might well be right, I'm on a couple of National surveys, and had two the day Dave did his stand up routine, expect those results to be posted anytime now..
Here's one already done http://uk.news.yahoo.com/britons-back-camerons-eu-veto-poll-232531493.html
weezer 316
11-Dec-11, 17:19
Do us a favour. Do you sit all day with your tongue running up and down the window ??, ever stop to think that perhaps you are thicker than a whale omelette ??, because you are. Are you saying that one of the EU's crowning glories is allowing LIDL to open some shops. Because, and you might want to huddle in for this one, that's called free
trade, which funnily enough is what the EU started out as in the Common Market. And I am fairly certain that existed long before the EU. Yes, it did.
As for Euro-sceptics out there, of which I am one, you state of the "enormous benefit" of the EU, without naming ONE while justifying your argument by labelling us of "mumbling and moaning without a clue of any specific examples" while dressed in head to toe of clothes made and branded on foreign shores and eating food from "bloody Alaska", I really think you should prise your tongue away from the window and grow a brain cell or two.
Lets look at what I am unhappy about with the EU.
1 .. The fact that I am now deemed a citizen of Europe without my consent.
2 .. The fact that I have to pay for this overgrown behemoth.
3 .. The fact that an unelected body can pass laws that overrides the Parliament I voted for.
4 .. The fact that when the EU gets a vote they don't like, they just keep doing it until the people get it right in their view. Ireland anyone ??
5 .. The fact that EU Human Rights laws mean that we cant deport scum because they have a cat or a family. Despite them killing people or denying others the rights they hide behind.
6 .. The fact that despite us having to bail out the Euro as an EU state we are told by the German's and their French Poodle Sarkozy that we have no right to influence the Eurozone. I am waiting for Merkel to stand up and say "Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Euro" .. it would be more honest.
7 .. The fact that the EU has, in the guise of the German and French Governments, imposed an unelected and EU acceptable administration in the governments of Greece and Italy. And weren't there major doubts at the time about Greece being able to meet the criteria of EU membership which are now all to fricking plain .. take a close look genius, they are bankrupt.
8 .. They tried to stop Irn Bru.
9 .. See point 8.
10 .. Norway is a non EU oil producing nation, they seem to be doing alright without having to prop up all the leeches of Europe.
Oh and by the way, before lecturing others you might want to check your spelling and punctuation. Because it looks like Stevie Wonder typed it while high on crack. And only a grade A idiot would not view the posturing by the German's and the French regarding the financial transaction tax, that would directly affect the City of London, as nothing to worry about in the terms you described.
I honestly find it difficult to believe you can be this thick without help.
Lol! Cheers for insinuating i am handicapped! i can be curt but Im never that bad! Anyway, your post is nonsense....
1: Irrelevant. Your a citizen of the world too. Is that some bodies fault?
2: It employs less people than the BBC and is Europe wide. Thats preety bloddy good by any measure! Im gonna gues you had no idea that was the case and I didnt either.
3: Who the hell are you on about? If your gonna say the european commision I am going to have a field day.
4: Not sure what you are on about there tbh. Can you clarify?
5: utter nonsense. Evidence please.
6: Did we bailout the Euro? i think you will find our bailout liability extedended to being part of the IMF who helpd with Greece, thats all. Yet more nonsense or possbly not knowing.
7: Agreed to a point. greece for sure joining the Euro. The Italian govt was about to fall (as it frequently does) and that was italians themselves behind it. Greece was the govt falling due to mass protests. they formed a solidarity govt. Not german imposed, or anyone for that matter.
8: Im not sure again what your on about. I think it might be the legislation against some colouring agent but im not sure. if thats what it is then evidently they didnt try to bar irn bru, that was just going to be one consequence of it.
9: See point 8
10: Yes they do fine. they have 3x as much oil as us so thats not realy an option for us is it?
Evidently you havent read what I wrote about the finainclial trasnaction tax (no suprise there tbh). Let me ask you, in the Uk, do you feel banks should pay more tax?
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 17:30
it strikes me that we all have different views on europe all very interesting and varied and not many which we all agree on. i have enjoyed reading about them but none has changed my view. the only thing to spoil this healthy debate has been a few nasty remarks direct at orgers for having an opinion
it has brought has stopped a war being fought in Europe for 70 years.
When i say I cannot wait for the current genenration brought up on war stories to just off I aint lying.
I think the nuclear bomb is responsible for preventing any wars Weezer, not the EU !!!
Did you miss a word out on purpose when you said you want my generation out of the way? Do you mean you want to see all us old one's dead? Could you clarify this please?
C3............[disgust][disgust]
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 19:26
Corrie you are spot on with that remark atomic weapons have indeed prevented war on a large scale in Europe. Hopefully it will stop us all falling out in the near future.
John Little
11-Dec-11, 19:36
Your emphasis may be wrong.
What has prevented large scale war in Europe since 1945 is more likely to be fear and not just of the bomb.
Fear of invasion let to the formation of the Western European Union in 1947. At that point the Soviet Union did not have the bomb. They did, however, possess an army of 260 divisions.
The benefits of mutual defence, co-operation in trade and some sort of customs union were already becoming apparent with the formation of Bizonia in Germany in 1947.
Nato was formed in April 1949.
Russia exploded their first bomb in August 1949.
So the organisations and alliances which welded the countries of western europe against outside aggression pre-date Russia's bomb.
Fear caused it. The bomb added to what already existed.
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 20:17
i think it was called M A D mutually assured distuction.
John Little
11-Dec-11, 20:53
That was a concept that came in with deterrence and really belongs to the late 1950s. It had its beginnings in a conversation in the garden of the White House in December 1949 between President Truman and Gen. Omar Bradley. It led to the biggest arms build up in History and an over-dependence on nuclear weapons so bad that when Kennedy asked about the invasion option for Cuba in 1962 the US army did not have the capability to do it.
The bomb did not keep the peace. What kept the peace was the Western Alliance and the co-operation entailed in the formation of the EU.
This came about through fear.
What the bomb did was act as a deep freeze where both sides developed the idea of existential deterrent where the bomb was supposed to deter attack simply because it existed. They would dearly have loved to stop building bombs because it was taking up too much of their national budgets but they were trapped. The only way to get rid of the bombs was to have absolute assurance that the other side was getting rid of their bombs. Technology finally caught up in 1961 when the CIA launched their first spy satellite - the Russians were not too far behind. This made disarmament possible.
The deterrence idea was actually discredited by US Defense Secretary Robert MacNamara in 1967. He was a smart guy and realised that if the US built an anti-ballistic missile system then the USSR would as well. He did not wish to spend the money on it any more than the Russians, so proposed a treaty banning ABMs. It would have been signed in 1968 if it had not been for the invasion of Czechoslovakia, but was not finally signed until 1972. Deterrence was well out of date by then and they were into SALT 1.
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 21:11
Thank you John. I was once told you should learn something new everyday and with that last posting I have cheers.
Of course, the real threat was 10,000 Tanks and a Million soldiers swooping across Europe from the East.
Me dad had that covered though with his Landrover Squadron. :cool:
John Little
11-Dec-11, 21:22
Nope - we had about 10,000.
They had 40,000... and more on the Chinese border.
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 21:24
o how things have changed in 30 years
John Little
11-Dec-11, 21:31
Yes indeed Bill- but the central point of this thread concerns Cameron. For centuries the nations of Europe competed against each other and the continent was devastated by wars which seemed part of the natural order.
Yet for 70 years they have, for the most part, kept the peace amongst themselves and largely because of trade, co-operation and a realisation that inter-dependency has great rewards in the shape of heightened civilisation and prosperity. It is worth being part of a great organisation of states because the prizes are bigger and the impact of adversity is less.
In unity is strength.
The old divisions simmer underneath; the old jealousies and territorial quarrels are still there - but sunk under the wave of European co-operation and civilisation which makes possible a higher standard of life than ever existed before.
Without this - the Deluge!
Cameron's attitude is a throwback to an older Little England mentality - and I use the word England advisedly.
I do not see that he has done the UK any favours by opting not to be in the boardroom of the EU but in the staff toilet!
o how things have changed in 30 years
Dont come out with quotes like that Bill....Young Weezer will have you killed off, he doesn't like us old ones hanging about!!
C3...................:eek::roll:
weezer 316
11-Dec-11, 21:43
I think the nuclear bomb is responsible for preventing any wars Weezer, not the EU !!!
Did you miss a word out on purpose when you said you want my generation out of the way? Do you mean you want to see all us old one's dead? Could you clarify this please?
C3............[disgust][disgust]
Well o a point the bomb has helped, but only insofar as there is a govt mad enough to use it, and bar the end of the second world war and potentially the North Koreans at theuir most desperate I am not sure anyone has the guts to fire one. But.....and this is the point......th fear of dying in a nuclear war comes second to the idea that you wont and therefore you need to live. and so tight are the econimies of Europe integrated now its virtually impossible to declare war on each other. That without a shadow of a doubt it the biggest reason, in my view, things havent got out of hand.
As for the older generation, I probabaly should clarify, I want them to get out of politics is what I meant.
As for the older generation, I probabaly should clarify, I want them to get out of politics is what I meant.
And why should we.
John Little
11-Dec-11, 21:50
Let us not disagree Weezie - age has been no bar to some of our greatest. Churchill was 64 before he became PM and Gladstone was 82 I believe when he formed his last ministry. Then there was Palmerston.
The elders of the tribe often have a lot of what is needed in them.
The flush of youth on Cameron's face - and wee Geordie Osborne do not inspire me with confidence. I prefer leaders who have been round the block a few times.
weezer 316
11-Dec-11, 21:57
Dont come out with quotes like that Bill....Young Weezer will have you killed off, he doesn't like us old ones hanging about!!
C3...................:eek::roll:
What can I say, tory to the core. Once you hit 60 its a shotgun to the back of the head.........after you empty your bank account!
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 22:01
What can I say, tory to the core. Once you hit 60 its a shotgun to the back of the head.........after you empty your bank account! is that in front of my family?
John Little
11-Dec-11, 22:03
is that in front of my family?
Better not- my great uncle Jack followed a chap called Moseley - you don't mess with them...
billmoseley
11-Dec-11, 22:44
BREAKING NEWS
To save the economy David Cameron will announce shortly that he is ordering the home office to start deporting old people (instead of illegal immigrants) in order to lower the pension bill and NHS costs. Old people are easier to catch and will not remember how to get home. I started crying when I thought of you. RUN OLD FRIEND, RUN.
(Well, someone sent this to me and I'm not going alone!)
[QUOTE=billmoseley;912692]BREAKING NEWS
To save the economy David Cameron will announce shortly that he is ordering the home office to start deporting old people (instead of illegal immigrants) in order to lower the pension bill and NHS costs. Old people are easier to catch and will not remember how to get home. I started crying when I thought of you. RUN OLD FRIEND, RUN.
(Well, someone sent this to me and I'm not going alone!)[/QUOTE
Mwahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. made me lol. [lol]
John Little
11-Dec-11, 22:58
If he's deporting us to Australia or New Zealand I volunteer!! One of the sunny bits please...
BREAKING NEWS
To save the economy David Cameron will announce shortly that he is ordering the home office to start deporting old people (instead of illegal immigrants) in order to lower the pension bill and NHS costs. Old people are easier to catch and will not remember how to get home. I started crying when I thought of you. RUN OLD FRIEND, RUN.
(Well, someone sent this to me and I'm not going alone!)
It seems like Cameron and Weezer think along the same lines eh Bill?
Well, thats the Tory's for you!!!
C3..............:roll:;)
I was at the docs, the other day. After talking about what we needed to do about my health meds and tests. I said to her i need putting down, she smiled wryly. I said, i shouldn't jest. They will probably be doing that soon. :eek:
John Little
11-Dec-11, 23:08
I was at the docs, the other day. After talking about what we needed to do about my health meds and tests. I said to her i need putting down, she smiled wryly. I said, i shouldn't jest. They will probably be doing that soon. :eek:
Nah Shazz - they can't do that to you! We all get to creak and grind and get bumps and lumps. But if I stop enjoying it - then they can put me down and I won't mind at all. But that's a different debate.
Nah Shazz - they can't do that to you! We all get to creak and grind and get bumps and lumps. But if I stop enjoying it - then they can put me down and I won't mind at all. But that's a different debate.
I'll be putting myself down. if i get anymore illnesses. ;)
I don't know about leaders having been around the block John but there's a few who should have their head put on one!
I don't know about leaders having been around the block John but there's a few who should have their head put on one!
Personally, I think the press want putting down. I watched the Andrew Marr interview with Nick Clegg myself, then immediately watched it misrepresented and edited to look completely different on the BBC news! [disgust]
John Little
12-Dec-11, 08:46
Personally, I think the press want putting down. I watched the Andrew Marr interview with Nick Clegg myself, then immediately watched it misrepresented and edited to look completely different on the BBC news! [disgust]
Wot did he say then? :confused
Wot did he say then? :confused
Well that's the point and the way they always do these things. They reported what he said in single sentences and only the sentences they wanted, to make it sound like a tirade against Davy, which it wasn't.
Then when reporting, they say So & So said this, but don't report all the other stuff they said that puts it in context.
Luckily, only idiots take the news at face value. Unluckily, there are a lot of idiots.
Not seen PMQs so dunno what CMD's take on this is. ?? Anyone?
Did he explain away his negotiating prowess?
Not seen PMQs so dunno what CMD's take on this is. ?? Anyone?
Did he explain away his negotiating prowess?
Interestingly, he asked I'm a Divvy Milliband (IDM) what he would have done, to which there was no answer.
I'm a Spineless Git Clegg (ISGC) Didn't show up!:lol:
You can see endless analysis on BBC News channel now.
I'm a Spineless Git Clegg (ISGC) Didn't show up!:lol:
But he insists the Coalition isn't cracking up...so that's your lot stumped for the next few years then Duke!! You are welcome to him, I think the Tory's deserve a spineless/gutless Deputy Prime Minister!!
C3................:roll:;)
John Little
12-Dec-11, 19:42
If this does not crack the Coalition up then Clegg has no principles whatsoever. He should pull out now.
If he does not then his party will be extinct after the next election.
But standing for principle might save him.
tonkatojo
12-Dec-11, 19:53
If this does not crack the Coalition up then Clegg has no principles whatsoever. He should pull out now.<br>
<br>
If he does not then his party will be extinct after the next election.<br>
<br>
But standing for principle might save him.<br>
<br>
Clegg and the rest of the dems know it and want to build up their pension pots, they wont relinquish their days of fame for Europe of or a little thing like a wee huff.<br>We will see hin in a few days giving out pre arranged jobs from last year or the like.
If this does not crack the Coalition up then Clegg has no principles whatsoever. He should pull out now.
If he does not then his party will be extinct after the next election.
But standing for principle might save him.
Wishful thinking John. Nothing will crack up the coalition, that is the principle they are standing by.
weezer 316
14-Dec-11, 12:06
I must say I am finding it very funny how all the people who called for more taxes and regulations on banks are saying Cameron did good by blocking a deal that did just that. Can someone please explain how these two positions can live together? Please? Its doublethink on an orwellian scale.......and I bet half them that back higher taxes for banks and the like have NO IDEA what cameron actually veto'd.
And in case I haven't said, hes made a huge mistake, and hes not made many.
I must say I am finding it very funny how all the people who called for more taxes and regulations on banks are saying Cameron did good by blocking a deal that did just that. Can someone please explain how these two positions can live together? Please? Its doublethink on an orwellian scale.......and I bet half them that back higher taxes for banks and the like have NO IDEA what cameron actually veto'd.
And in case I haven't said, hes made a huge mistake, and hes not made many.
Another mistake he made Weezer.........He said that the private sector would take up the jobs lost in the public sector...Figures for last month...= 65000 jobs lost in the public sector..........5000 jobs created in the private sector!!!!
Oh boy did he get that one wrong!!!
C3..................:eek::roll:
weezer 316
14-Dec-11, 13:02
Oh corrie give it a rest will you! It doesnt happen in one month and I think your figures are out, just like Ecks!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15234228
2nd Last paragraph, OBR reckons it will create 900 000 more jobs by 2015 than lost in public sector. Or are you going down the well trodden path of cherry picking figures and ignoring the ones that dont fit your aim!
PMQs today, in answer to a question from IDM about the rift in the coalition, CMD said "it's not that bad, it's not like we're brothers or anything!"[lol]
PMQs today, in answer to a question from IDM about the rift in the coalition, CMD said "it's not that bad, it's not like we're brothers or anything!"[lol]
Yeah that doesn't sound staged at all. I wonder how many PR people they had working on that one.
Oh corrie give it a rest will you! It doesnt happen in one month and I think your figures are out, just like Ecks!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15234228
2nd Last paragraph, OBR reckons it will create 900 000 more jobs by 2015 than lost in public sector. Or are you going down the well trodden path of cherry picking figures and ignoring the ones that dont fit your aim!
Read the 2nd sentence just underneath the Title "Gloomy outlook" near the bottom of the page Weezer!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16175309
And if this great plan is going to work then why dont the Govt let the private sector create all these jobs before ending the public sector jobs, that way no one has to go on the dole!!!
I am only going on what the BBC tells me!!
C3..........:eek:;)
weezer 316
14-Dec-11, 14:27
Oh I dont know Corrie, maybe its something to do with the fact we are losing £150bn a year and have nearly £1tr in debt to pay???
No actually it couldnt be that now that I think about it...........
THINK!
I must say I am finding it very funny how all the people who called for more taxes and regulations on banks are saying Cameron did good by blocking a deal that did just that. Can someone please explain how these two positions can live together? Please? Its doublethink on an orwellian scale.......and I bet half them that back higher taxes for banks and the like have NO IDEA what cameron actually veto'd.
And in case I haven't said, hes made a huge mistake, and hes not made many.
First off he made a mistake by not negotiating a deal he could sign upto.
As for regulation & taxation, I believe that should be a sovereign affair. Not a half arsed, semi applied measure from the EU.
The main point for me was to retain control of our budgets in the UK, I do not see how regulation from Brussels will be applied & work across the EU and be fair.
Like it or not the city is a big part of our economy and revenue stream, we don't want to balls it up overnight for the UK like other EU reg's have (due to the way we implement them).
As for the coalition / Nicky n' Davey show. Is it not normal professional practice to disagree on things but get on with the job?
weezer 316
14-Dec-11, 18:33
First off he made a mistake by not negotiating a deal he could sign upto.
As for regulation & taxation, I believe that should be a sovereign affair. Not a half arsed, semi applied measure from the EU.
The main point for me was to retain control of our budgets in the UK, I do not see how regulation from Brussels will be applied & work across the EU and be fair.
Like it or not the city is a big part of our economy and revenue stream, we don't want to balls it up overnight for the UK like other EU reg's have (due to the way we implement them).
As for the coalition / Nicky n' Davey show. Is it not normal professional practice to disagree on things but get on with the job?
Phil,
Come on now, we are adults who are aware of the going on in the real world. Are you telling me that a deal( remember they have to agree to it..........), the details of whcih are yet to be agreed upon, and the regulations hey will place on member states (remember they have to agree to it..........) is in some way a violation of soverignty (remember they have to agree to it..........) and that they will be "half arsed" remembering that the details of it are yet to be agreed upon?
Tell me other EU legislation thats "half arsed" will you? Human rights act possibly? And where has it "ballsed up" the UK economy?
I say people like you and your luddite attitude, not to mention xenophobia unless they are going to buy your product, are the probelm in Europe, not the EU, its rules and regs and is aims.
And dont forget.......we agreed to ALL of it before you moan about it!
The problem is that the UK wanted and wants a single market.
All the other major players in Europe want a federal United States of Europe. Sooner or later we are going to have to leave them to it.
weezer 316
14-Dec-11, 22:50
If it truly is the single market surely we are then duty bound to go along with the laws proposed to help in that single market are we not? The market clearly doesnt exist in isolation to the rules of the EU, like ensuring consumer rights accross the board. We either get in there and be part of the single market, risks and rewards and all, or we pull out entirely.
I must say the tories really pee me off on Europe, they advocate private enterprise, and overwhemingly business are in favour of EU membership as it gives them access to the worlds largest internal market, yet they are very anti-EU which is seeminly at odds with their core support.
Phil,
Come on now, we are adults who are aware of the going on in the real world. Are you telling me that a deal( remember they have to agree to it..........), the details of whcih are yet to be agreed upon, and the regulations hey will place on member states (remember they have to agree to it..........) is in some way a violation of soverignty (remember they have to agree to it..........) and that they will be "half arsed" remembering that the details of it are yet to be agreed upon?EU Regulations and treaties normally take years (yes, years) to thrash out, normally by those who operate in the fields the reg's apply and with consultation from industry bodies. This was churned out over dinner by a bunch of politicos (who, by the very nature of their job & position are not of the real world) and which details "are yet to be agreed on" !! If that ain't half arsed what is?
Would it not be the case that, if agreed to, member states would be restricted in their annual budgets and would have to have them sanctioned by the commission in Brussels?
(As an aside: Is it in any way democratic? How can we have a democratic election based on proposal budgets in manifesto's of the various parties, when if they came to power their budgets could be thrown out by the EU?!!!)
Wasn't part of this deal that the EU Court of Justice would wield power over the UK (never mind the people who think it's bad enough Scotland is ruled from Westminster).?
Tell me other EU legislation thats "half arsed" will you? Human rights act possibly? And where has it "ballsed up" the UK economy?OK, I'll hand you that one. Other reg's aren't necessarily half arsed, they're fully arsed. :lol:
TBH I don't deal with the Human Rights Act so I can't really comment there. There is this: 2006/112/EC & C-382/02. Also No 2454/93 is half arsed, but in fairness they have been working on changing this for a few years now and this may come into effect in 2014.
I say people like you and your luddite attitude, not to mention xenophobia unless they are going to buy your product, are the probelm in Europe, not the EU, its rules and regs and is aims.
Hmmm, xenophobic Luddite......Yeah, you might be right.
This xenophobic ludite is an EU & international trader. I hold CT authorisations (EU reg's apply) up & down the UK in support of international trade compliance with EU regs. My clients are EU, UK domestic, US and worldwide. I have spent time in the US and in Europe meeting my clients, I was invited to the US to deliver a presentation on, yes you've guessed it EU Regulations.
I am one of a very few traders who actually make a point of ensuring my clients meet with and comply fully with, yes again, EU regulations. Because, that is what we have agreed too. I have invested a small fortune in systems and access to EU & gov't systems to ensure I can deliver complete EU regulatory compliance to my clients, for this I hold a £50million guarantee with Her Majesty's Gov't (EU Reg's).
I invested in a service which is, go on, go on, go on........ another EU regulation. Which, surprise surprise, isn't enforced across the EU. So another net loss by complying with EU reg's.
And I am watching potential clients go to other EU countries who don't apply many EU regulations because it looses them trade if they do.
Luddite, yes. Xenophobic, no.
weezer 316
15-Dec-11, 14:07
Phil come on, we dont know the details yet, so you simply cannot make a judgement such as that.
As for the budgets, yes it appears that would be the case. However, and again I feel like a broken record, if the govt agrees to it, bear in mind its a govt which has the power through a democratic election to decide such things, then there is nothing remotely dodgy about it. Otherwise you are essentially saying that the government doesnt have the right to do certain things, and in that case your anger should be directed at the govt, not the EU.
I would interested if you could name this regulation that isnt enforced across the EU? Im not a lawyer but I am pretty sure you have the right to pursue cases where EU law is not being complied with through the courts, are you not?
I've already given you a couple. Try this one:
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code
I'm not in the position to police the EU, surely it must do that itself. I certainly do not have the time, capabilities nor the finance to start taking the EU to court either.
The general point is in a certain number of areas the UK, and other member states, should be able to retain control.
As I said before, we need another decade or so to get members aligned and the feet on the ground dancing to the same tune.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.