Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Brexit discussion thread II

  • 13-07-2017 10:57pm
    #1
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Those with long memories will recall the economic war of the nineteen thirties where the Irish Gov refused to pay the annuity money to the British Gov saying they were due to the Irish Gov (Dev was responsible for this). Britain retaliated by refusing to buy Irish beef. As a consequence, the Irish herd was culled with no market. Come 1939, Britain decided to begin buying Irish beef again because of the war. Unfortunately, they were too late - there was no beef.

    Let us hope history is not repeated.
    Back then we didn't have a world wide market.

    More recently we've been able to export beef to markets like the Middle East which the UK couldn't because of politics.

    Also the drop in sterling makes the UK less attractive to our exporters.


«134567…183

Comments

  • #2
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    The repeal bill is already causing issues.
    Any Tory defections and it won't pass.

    And who thinks the DUP will give up devolved powers to a UK government that has done squat on the border issue ?
    Especially when things going south means everything could literally go south as the possibility of border poll can't be ruled out.


    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40589510
    Labour says it will not support the bill in its current form and is demanding concessions in six areas, including the incorporation of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights into British law.
    ...

    But the Scottish and Welsh governments have to give "legislative consent" to the bill before it can become law - something they have said they are not willing to do.

    In a joint statement, first ministers Nicola Sturgeon and Carwyn Jones, who also met Mr Barnier, described the bill as a "naked power-grab" by Westminster that undermined the principles of devolution.

    They say the bill returns powers from Brussels solely to the UK government and Parliament and "imposes new restrictions" on the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.


  • #3
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Are you honestly saying the UK can be self reliant?
    not for food. Not even close.
    Only 54% is home grown.

    Technically ICI did have a plant making single celled protein "pruteen" (animal feed unless you are are really hungry) that could produce as much as an area the size of Wales covered in soya. But it wasn't cheap as it used natural gas as the feedstock.



    atlas_S1vGKAcS.png

    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    And transport
    They are nominally self sufficient for petroleum products in that export and import values match.

    They are importing LNG from the US too.

    Electricity is a different issue though as they import that from the EU.


    And nurses , http://www.bbc.com/news/education-40581643
    The figures show a sharp decline in those applying to study nursing courses - down 19%


  • #4
    ambro25
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Long memories, I think you mean ling lives?

    A 1930 trade war is relevant to a discussion about Brexit in 2019?

    This thread really has become an echo chamber from the usual anti British little Irelanders.
    I agree that 'glib' references to 1930s and 1940s are hardly constructive here...

    ...that said however, considering the socio-economic consequences which the UK is facing from the worst possible forms of Brexit, the parallel is not completely without merit.

    I believe that this whole Brexit thing, when all is said and done and its effects percolate fully down to the individual level across the length and breadth of the country, will leave a mark on the collective British psyche, far worse than Thatcherism, the miners' strike and similar 'peacetime' divisive occurrences ever did or could.

    It will be, and remain, a factor of intense personal and political division for decades, never less so than between older and younger generations.

    Regardless of whether the UK actually Brexits or not in the end (because either outcome will have far-reaching consequences).


  • #5
    wes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    What do you mean Wes? The DUP are hoping Brexit will help reverse the soft unification of Ireland, living standards in the north be damned.

    When I hear of Britain being self-sufficient my mind goes to this for some reason:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35NpLveVZDg

    I didn't mention the DUP, something gone wrong with the quote there.


  • #6
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    ambro25 wrote: »
    I agree that 'glib' references to 1930s and 1940s are hardly constructive here...

    ...that said however, considering the socio-economic consequences which the UK is facing from the worst possible forms of Brexit, the parallel is not completely without merit.

    I believe that this whole Brexit thing, when all is said and done and its effects percolate fully down to the individual level across the length and breadth of the country, will leave a mark on the collective British psyche, far worse than Thatcherism, the miners' strike and similar 'peacetime' divisive occurrences ever did or could.

    It will be, and remain, a factor of intense personal and political division for decades, never less so than between older and younger generations.

    Regardless of whether the UK actually Brexits or not in the end (because either outcome will have far-reaching consequences).

    I agree there are very deep divisions in the UK at the moment and Brexit is causing a needless amount of economic and political unrest.

    I think we are still some way from seeing U-Boats blockading the channel though :D


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    This thread really has become an echo chamber from the usual anti British little Irelanders.
    To be fair Fred there are several posters like myself in this thread who would (prior to Brexit) have borne no malice towards the UK and could have even conceived closer ties with the country. Relations between our countries had never been better. Brexit has certainly changed for the worse how I feel about the UK.

    The UK press and political class have lazily blamed the EU for everything, even controllable immigration and controllable EU immigration at that! The UK never even tried to apply the rules as applied by Germany, Belgium, France etc. that prevent benefits and health tourism of EU nationals. Germany tells newly arrived Brits to go home after 3 months on welfare. The UK simply never did. Even if there are few EU scroungers (which I believe to be the case) in the UK, it would have been an end to the Daily Mail's endless protests about this issue had the UK simply enforced these regulations.


  • #8
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    murphaph wrote: »
    To be fair Fred there are several posters like myself in this thread who would (prior to Brexit) have borne no malice towards the UK and could have even conceived closer ties with the country. Relations between our countries had never been better. Brexit has certainly changed for the worse how I feel about the UK.

    The UK press and political class have lazily blamed the EU for everything, even controllable immigration and controllable EU immigration at that! The UK never even tried to apply the rules as applied by Germany, Belgium, France etc. that prevent benefits and health tourism of EU nationals. Germany tells newly arrived Brits to go home after 3 months on welfare. The UK simply never did. Even if there are few EU scroungers (which I believe to be the case) in the UK, it would have been an end to the Daily Mail's endless protests about this issue had the UK simply enforced these regulations.

    every country in europe blames the eu, that's why Junckers said this https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/stop-bashing-the-eu-jean-claude-juncker-tells-european-leaders

    we blamed them over here for forcing us to bail out German bond holders and enforcing water charges and property taxes on us.


  • #9
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,678 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    every country in europe blames the eu, that's why Junckers said this https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/stop-bashing-the-eu-jean-claude-juncker-tells-european-leaders

    we blamed them over here for forcing us to bail out German bond holders and enforcing water charges and property taxes on us.
    Yes. But we have the maturity to recognise when we're venting and blowing off steam. We don't proceed to leave the EU because we're unhappy about water charges.


  • #10
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,543 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    As the old thread was nearing 10,000 posts it has been closed. Please continue the discussion here.

    New users please read the charter before posting.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #11
    An Ciarraioch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,806 ✭✭✭An Ciarraioch


    UK airports warn about crashing out of the Open Skies Agreement on Brexit Day - still, there's always Jersey and the Isle of Man for overseas travel! :D

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/british-airports-warn-flights-to-europe-will-be-grounded-aviation/


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    EasyJet will create a new airline based in Vienna that will shield its routes within the European Union from any fallout from Brexit.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/easyjet-to-set-up-austria-base-to-run-eu-flights-after-brexit-1.3154833

    More and more companies hedging their bets . And even if we get to March 2019 and the UK decides to change it's mind. Most of these companies aren't going to return to the UK


    Mean while in Parliament
    At least 15 Conservative MPs are in talks with a Labour MP to prevent a hard Brexit – potentially enough to defeat Theresa May in the Commons.

    Stephen Kinnock said there was a “growing recognition” of the need for Britain to embrace a Norway-style arrangement to head off the threat of severe economic damage.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-conservative-mps-labour-defeat-theresa-may-hard-stephen-kinnock-eu-european-union-a7840446.html

    It's so hard to know where the lay of the land is . Each vote causes new alliances to be formed and old alliance to fall apart


  • #13
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Yes. But we have the maturity to recognise when we're venting and blowing off steam. We don't proceed to leave the EU because we're unhappy about water charges.

    It would be very very different if Ireland were paying billions a year, instead of receiving it I guess.


  • #14
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    It would be very very different if Ireland were paying billions a year, instead of receiving it I guess.

    Ireland is a net contributor.


  • #15
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Ireland is a net contributor.

    barely and only a recent occurance


  • #16
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    barely and only a recent occurance

    It's still a fact that Ireland is a net contributor.

    Anyway, the contributions that the UK was making to the EU were part of a wider package. I know that the NHS will be 200 million a week better off.... But the fact remains that Britain will lose more economically than it will gain.


  • #17
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    barely and only a recent occurance

    The EU is much like paying taxes. Those of us that do grumble and moan about it but we know having a referendum to abolish taxes would be foolhardy to say the least, as there is a possibility it would actually pass and then we would be up **** creek. Like like the UK now


  • #18
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I know that the NHS will be 200 million a week better off.... But the fact remains that Britain will lose more economically than it will gain.

    That is a stupid comment.

    The fact still remains that in Ireland, the EU has been visibly beneficial, whereas to the UK, it is far less visible.
    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    The EU is much like paying taxes. Those of us that do grumble and moan about it but we know having a referendum to abolish taxes would be foolhardy to say the least, as there is a possibility it would actually pass and then we would be up **** creek. Like like the UK now

    Or a referendum on a united Ireland....


  • #19
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Or a referendum on a united Ireland....

    I'm not seeing the link?


  • #20
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    That is a stupid comment.

    The fact still remains that in Ireland, the EU has been visibly beneficial, whereas to the UK, it is far less visible.



    Or a referendum on a united Ireland....

    If you are going to call a comment 'stupid' you should have the grace and wit to explain why. Unless it's just because you have no argument?


  • #21
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    I'm not seeing the link?

    because financially it is a stupid thing to do, but it might pass because people aren't always interested in finances.
    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    If you are going to call a comment 'stupid' you should have the grace and wit to explain why. Unless it's just because you have no argument?

    why is a comment that the NHS will receive £200million per week extra stupid?

    really?


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    because financially it is a stupid thing to do, but it might pass because people aren't always interested in finances.

    Unlike brexit though it would be a short term financial harm rather than long term harm. Anyway we are getting off topic


  • #23
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    because financially it is a stupid thing to do, but it might pass because people aren't always interested in finances.



    why is a comment that the NHS will receive £200million per week extra stupid?

    really?

    I'm just quoting the Brexiteers' claim that funding for the NHS would increase. Not my stupid comment it was theirs. In fact they claimed it would be 350 million. Which is even more stupid. So you're right. Their comment was very stupid.


  • #24
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Unlike brexit though it would be a short term financial harm rather than long term harm. Anyway we are getting off topic

    would it?

    No one knows for definite if the UK will be worse off after Brexit. All we know is that no one is investing in the UK until the final terms are known.
    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I'm just quoting the Brexiteers' claim that funding for the NHS would increase. Not my stupid comment it was theirs. In fact they claimed it would be 350 million. Which is even more stupid. So you're right. Their comment was very stupid.

    You see, this is where this thread just gets really really daft. You are convinced that "Brexiteers" are one combined group that all think the same. This is quite clearly not the case, but then, admitting this means that stupid little throw away comments like yours can't be used.

    btw, you haven;t used the term "Little Englander" for three or four posts now, you're slipping.:rolleyes:


  • #25
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    would it?

    No one knows for definite if the UK will be worse off after Brexit. All we know is that no one is investing in the UK until the final terms are known.



    You see, this is where this thread just gets really really daft. You are convinced that "Brexiteers" are one combined group that all think the same. This is quite clearly not the case, but then, admitting this means that stupid little throw away comments like yours can't be used.

    btw, you haven;t used the term "Little Englander" for three or four posts now, you're slipping.:rolleyes:

    Actually, I don't know what point you're trying to make. Genuinely, your post doesn't make sense to me. But I'll respond to what I think you're saying.

    Thanks for reminding me. The Little Englanders such as Boris and Nigel duped the British people during the referendum campaign. They continue to dupe them. That is why a barefaced lie such as the money for the NHS is very relevant today. The Little Englanders such as Davies, Boris and Fox are lying right now to the British public. Don't even get me started on the hypocrite May.


  • #26
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,788 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    You see, this is where this thread just gets really really daft. You are convinced that "Brexiteers" are one combined group that all think the same. This is quite clearly not the case, but then, admitting this means that stupid little throw away comments like yours can't be used.

    btw, you haven;t used the term "Little Englander" for three or four posts now, you're slipping.:rolleyes:


    Wait, because the Leave campaign had many different fronts it was fighting on it means that criticisms of the lies of one of the campaigns cannot be brought up? Is that what you are saying? Or are you implying not many people believed the £350m per week for the NHS line?


  • #27
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    An Ciarraioch wrote: »
    UK airports warn about crashing out of the Open Skies Agreement on Brexit Day

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40604375
    UK airline EasyJet is planning to set up a new company in Austria to protect its European business after Britain leaves the EU.

    The new airline, EasyJet Europe, will be based in Vienna.


  • #28
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    It would be very very different if Ireland were paying billions a year, instead of receiving it I guess.

    It might but it depends on how you perceive "value for money".

    The UK, for instance, benefits from having roughly 2/3s of its exports tariff free due to its EU membership and the EU's FTAs. Obviously if you don't have to pay a charge, you are certainly getting some value for your money but if you don't perceive that as the service is "free" - a bit like our "free" water services - or if you naively assume that everyone will fall over themselves to give you new FTAs with even better terms - the same service but at a lower price - then you will believe that you are a "net contributor" and getting poor value for money as you only see the charges and not the benefits - a short term accountant's viewpoint in other words of the sort that had the Government convinced that Anglo-Irish was an amazing bank in the early 2000s.


  • #29
    joeysoap
    Registered Users Posts: 6,252 ✭✭✭joeysoap


    so if I have a property in say Dublin and I pay more property tax than a similar house in Donegal I should cry unfair?

    If I earn 60,000 and somebody in my workplace earns 30,000 I should complain that I pay more tax?

    Everybody knows how the tax system works.

    The UK was well aware of the rules on contribution when they joined. They cried about it and got a reduced contribution but if you really want a fair EU then some must contribute more than others. In time we will pay more too and so will some of the countries who are now net beneficiaries. It's how the system works.

    As for the NHS getting £300 million a week more, well Farange says he never said that and whistling Boris said he didn't put it there. So that's that then, nothing to see here, move on.

    And as for voters who voted Brexit because they did'nt want straight bananas, I think we'll park that.


  • #30
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    The billions the UK paid in pales in comparison to the economic benefit Britain reaped from the single market. If they didn't I would say leaving the EU was a good idea.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Bushmanpm
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Bushmanpm


    steddyeddy wrote:
    The billions the UK paid in pales in comparison to the economic benefit Britain reaped from the single market. If they didn't I would say leaving the EU was a good idea.


    That economic benefit works both ways. There are loads of sources available (and I'm cr4p at posting links!) but overall Britain imports far more than it exports to the EU.
    The main problem with the EU is when they tie movement of people and the European judiciary to the economics.
    Economies DO require a certain amount of political rules but they should be kept to a minimum so as to not unduly interfere with market forces. Unfortunately this approach won't fuel the EU Gravy Train and all their "side projects"
    Despite whatever Michel Barnier, Guy Verhofstadt and J C Junker say, the likes of Siemens, Renault, Mercedes Benz, Schneider, Bosch, Peugeot, Pirelli, VW, Moet and all the other tech, food or motor industries will not like losing out all those exports and the outcome will be, ahem, interesting.
    *gets skip load of popcorn


  • #32
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,698 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    because financially it is a stupid thing to do, but it might pass because people aren't always interested in finances.


    honestly I'd agree. I'd hope that well in advance of any such referendum both the UK and Ireland and probably also the EU would draw up some sort of timetable for the process of unification before putting it to referendum. So the effect of unification would be minimised at least to the extent that it's effect on the economy would be spread out over simply shocking it in the short term.

    Sadly between Brexit showing governments being incapable of doing simply that and running into things with no plan or policy. Also the tendency for issues like unification popping up less out of a planned process but more an act of necessity (see: German reunification) and ends up a bit rushed leaving long term effects.


  • #33
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    The billions the UK paid in pales in comparison to the economic benefit Britain reaped from the single market. If they didn't I would say leaving the EU was a good idea.

    Does it? Can you honestly tell an unemployed ex miner from sunderland, or a struggling fisherman from Shetland that being in the eu is economically good for them?

    Yeah, it allows British business export to Europe easily and better still, it gives them the chance to exploit cheap labour as well. Is that really a major advantage for the average Joe?


  • #34
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Does it? Can you honestly tell an unemployed ex miner from sunderland, or a struggling fisherman from Shetland that being in the eu is economically good for them?

    Yeah, it allows British business export to Europe easily and better still, it gives them the chance to exploit cheap labour as well. Is that really a major advantage for the average Joe?

    And how will a hard Brexit improve their lot?


  • #35
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Does it? Can you honestly tell an unemployed ex miner from sunderland, or a struggling fisherman from Shetland that being in the eu is economically good for them?

    Yeah, it allows British business export to Europe easily and better still, it gives them the chance to exploit cheap labour as well. Is that really a major advantage for the average Joe?
    The ex miner might get a job at Nissan with the UK in the EU but long term there will be no Nissan in Sunderland by the looks of it. They can't even agree on citizens' rights and that should be done and dusted by now really.

    Even those on welfare need to understand that the welfare payment comes ultimately from UK trade with the rest of the world and the vast majority of that is with the EU. Just because things are bad for someone doesn't mean they can't get worse when the tax take from London banks starts to diminish.

    In this regard I think the average Irish person understands the benefits of EU membership to trade perhaps better than the average British person. That's my gut feeling anyway.


  • #36
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    the likes of Siemens, Renault, Mercedes Benz, Schneider, Bosch, Peugeot, Pirelli, VW, Moet and all the other tech, food or motor industries will not like losing out all those exports and the outcome will be, ahem, interesting.

    Even in the worst case scenario those exports to the UK won't suddenly disappear, they'll just become more expensive. So if EU exports to the UK become, say, 10% more expensive, they can expect to lose 10% of thier business with the UK. So if Perelli exports 15% of its stuff to the UK it can expect to lose 1.5% of its trade in the short term. The whole 'EU based exporters to Britain will freak out' thing is seriously overplayed.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Does it? Can you honestly tell an unemployed ex miner from sunderland, or a struggling fisherman from Shetland that being in the eu is economically good for them?
    you make it sound that like the struggling fisherman isn't struggling because of overfishing of a finite resource, or that most of the quota isn't held by three companies or that nearly half the quota is held by foreign companies.

    It's like agriculture. Farm labourers are a lot rarer with today's technology - you only need a small fraction of the number of fishermen you used to - unless you get rid of the big companies but that's against Tory religion.


    On just one trip the Atlantic Dawn would put thousands of African fishermen out of work by hoovering up the fish. How may became migrants ?

    Oddly enough EU regional funds would probably be of more use to the Shetlands than relying on the London. Without the ECJ or the working time directive they will have the "freedom" to work more hours or zero hours.


  • #38
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,414 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    murphaph wrote: »
    In this regard I think the average Irish person understands the benefits of EU membership to trade perhaps better than the average British person. That's my gut feeling anyway.

    That would be my impression as well. In general I find that the Irish and the Swiss tend to be better informed. I think a lot has to do with the fact that both have the concept of tactical (next government) and strategic (constitutional change) voting. And thus it produces a voter with a very different perspective.


  • #39
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,414 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    The main problem with the EU is when they tie movement of people and the European judiciary to the economics.

    No the main problem is that people fail to understand is that you cannot have a single market with out the free movement of all forms of capital, single jurisdiction etc. The single market in each member state works that way and yet people fail to project that on to a single EU wide market. But at the same time if the Uk were to introduce restrictions on the movement of people within the country they'd all be jumping up and down in protest.


  • #40
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,084 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Does it? Can you honestly tell an unemployed ex miner from sunderland, or a struggling fisherman from Shetland that being in the eu is economically good for them?

    Yeah, it allows British business export to Europe easily and better still, it gives them the chance to exploit cheap labour as well. Is that really a major advantage for the average Joe?
    Wasn't it the Tories that closed the mines? And isn't it the EU that is supporting projects in those deprived areas.

    I can't say I know a whole lot about the CFP but without the quotas there would be no fish in the sea at all. In any case these things aren't imposed but negotiated. It was up to the UK government to stick up for it's fishermen but it had more important interests. It wanted wind in finance regulation so offered up the fishermen on that particular altar. Farmers can now expect the same as they will be sacrificed in order to maintain access to Europe for the city.


  • #41
    Mal-Adjusted
    Registered Users Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭Mal-Adjusted


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    you make it sound that like the struggling fisherman isn't struggling because of overfishing of a finite resource, or that most of the quota isn't held by three companies or that nearly half the quota is held by foreign companies.

    forgive me if i'm wrong, but wasn't one of Ireland's stated aims of the Common Fisheries Policy reform that the bulk of quotas go to local fishing communities rather than the big massive super trawlers?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,333 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    Even in the worst case scenario those exports to the UK won't suddenly disappear, they'll just become more expensive. So if EU exports to the UK become, say, 10% more expensive, they can expect to lose 10% of thier business with the UK. So if Perelli exports 15% of its stuff to the UK it can expect to lose 1.5% of its trade in the short term. The whole 'EU based exporters to Britain will freak out' thing is seriously overplayed.
    You are making an incorrect assumption; first of all you assume there is a straight parallel in price elastic between 10% price increase and losing 10% of the customers. Chances are that a 10% price increase would lose you way more than 10% of your customers simply because of easier to get alternatives.

    Secondly and this is the real kicker the problem will not be the initial 10% price increase, longer lead times etc. but future investments. Where will Pierelli place that new tire production? UK or in a EU country? Where will Toyota place that new car platform, in a UK plant or a EU factory? Where will you spend money to build more capacity? Those type of investments are not going to be readily easy to find but you can be sure that if a country suddenly costs over 10% more (tariffs, added cost of dealing with two legislations, customs etc.) they will be redirected.


  • #43
    Bushmanpm
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Bushmanpm


    Jim2007 wrote:
    No the main problem is that people fail to understand is that you cannot have a single market with out the free movement of all forms of capital, single jurisdiction etc. The single market in each member state works that way and yet people fail to project that on to a single EU wide market. But at the same time if the Uk were to introduce restrictions on the movement of people within the country they'd all be jumping up and down in protest.


    If I want to provide you with my goods or services, what has our private trade got to do with some gravy train riding Brussels parasite? Or foreign nationals moving to a country with far more favourable welfare? Or some scumbag crook crying "my human rights" at every given opportunity when caught?
    I personally cannot see what that has got to do with two parties wanting to trade with each other, other than unnecessary bureaucracy run by unnecessary bureaucrats lining their own pockets AND collecting a massive pension afterwards. At OUR expense.


  • #44
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    If I want to provide you with my goods or services, what has our private trade got to do with some gravy train riding Brussels parasite? Or foreign nationals moving to a country with far more favourable welfare? Or some scumbag crook crying "my human rights" at every given opportunity when caught?
    I personally cannot see what that has got to do with two parties wanting to trade with each other, other than unnecessary bureaucracy run by unnecessary bureaucrats lining their own pockets AND collecting a massive pension afterwards. At OUR expense.

    If that's how you see it then you should definitely leave the EU. It's obviously not for you.


  • #45
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,931 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    If I want to provide you with my goods or services, what has our private trade got to do with some gravy train riding Brussels parasite? Or foreign nationals moving to a country with far more favourable welfare? Or some scumbag crook crying "my human rights" at every given opportunity when caught?
    I personally cannot see what that has got to do with two parties wanting to trade with each other, other than unnecessary bureaucracy run by unnecessary bureaucrats lining their own pockets AND collecting a massive pension afterwards. At OUR expense.

    Completely myopic and one-sighted view and not very relevant for all that in fairness.
    Myopic and one-sighted in the sense that you just ignore all the good things the EU has done for it's citizens.
    Of course it isn't perfect but the alternative of a free for all, do what you want environment just hands the advantage to those with the money and power to do what they want, economically and socially.
    Not a society I want anyhow, even if at times the EU might restrict.


  • #46
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Nody wrote: »
    You are making an incorrect assumption; first of all you assume there is a straight parallel in price elastic between 10% price increase and losing 10% of the customers. Chances are that a 10% price increase would lose you way more than 10% of your customers simply because of easier to get alternatives.
    10% on a Merc or BMW won't reduce demand much if there isn't a locally built alternative with the same snob value. 10% on generic cars in a crowded market , good luck with that.

    10% on commodity items like nuts and bolts is game over.
    Secondly and this is the real kicker the problem will not be the initial 10% price increase, longer lead times etc. but future investments. Where will Pierelli place that new tire production? UK or in a EU country? Where will Toyota place that new car platform, in a UK plant or a EU factory?
    With the new Japanese trade deal Toyota also have the option to build the cars in Japan.


  • #47
    Bushmanpm
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Bushmanpm


    Professor Moriarty wrote:
    If that's how you see it then you should definitely leave the EU. It's obviously not for you.


    My mind is open for changing, show me where I'm wrong?


  • #48
    Bushmanpm
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Bushmanpm


    FrancieBrady wrote:
    Completely myopic and one-sighted view and not very relevant for all that in fairness. Myopic and one-sighted in the sense that you just ignore all the good things the EU has done for it's citizens. Of course it isn't perfect but the alternative of a free for all, do what you want environment just hands the advantage to those with the money and power to do what they want, economically and socially. Not a society I want anyhow, even if at times the EU might restrict.


    "The EU do good things" is so old and tired I'm surprised people still say it, and I'M myopic? Hahahahahahahaha
    Hint: they can only do it with someone else's money. Its like me telling you what to spend your money on with the assumption that I know better than you.
    It wouldn't be a free for all as each nation still has its own governments to regulate, just remember the governments funding has to come from somewhere, they themselves cannot make money. National debts and deficit borrowing SERIOUSLY need addressing lest we saddle our grandchildren and even great grandchildren with our current stupidity.


  • #49
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Bush, I see a lot of fury and little sense.
    BTW, Govn'ts can create money. It's called QE.


  • #50
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,931 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    "The EU do good things" is so old and tired I'm surprised people still say it, and I'M myopic? Hahahahahahahaha
    Hint: they can only do it with someone else's money. Its like me telling you what to spend your money on with the assumption that I know better than you.
    It wouldn't be a free for all as each nation still has its own governments to regulate, just remember the governments funding has to come from somewhere, they themselves cannot make money. National debts and deficit borrowing SERIOUSLY need addressing lest we saddle our grandchildren and even great grandchildren with our current stupidity.

    Nobody I know claims the EU doesn't have to change and stay on top of the game.

    But you completely ignore the fact that generally the citizens of the EU (including those in the UK) are better off economically and socially as a result of the EU.

    Ask any worker is his/her lot better off regarding rights since the foundation of the community. It's a no brainer really. Of course they are.

    Even the massive economy of the UK collapsed pre EU and it's economy terminally depressed. That is why the imperative to join the EC grew and they overcame their qualms.
    Can you seriously contend that they didn't receive a massive boost from joining? Do the disadvantages outweigh what they have gained?
    I suppose we are about to see. A lesson for all member states is about to be learned one way or another. And at the moment the 'stay in the EU' side is winning, hands down.


  • #51
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Bushmanpm wrote: »
    My mind is open for changing, show me where I'm wrong?

    I'm assuming you're British? If so, Britain's greatest cost will be economically. And workers' rights will be greatly diminished. What you want will necessitate a hard Brexit. It also won't necessarily address all of your issues.

    Regarding crooks "crying "my human rights"", the EU has made it very clear that the ECHR and the ECJ will apply to any EU citizens living in Britain post Brexit.

    Regarding foreigners moving to avail of "more favourable welfare", the maximum they are entitled to is three months plus the procedure to get welfare in the first place is extremely stringent. As it happens, Britain has extra rules above and beyond the strict EU rules.

    Regarding "gravy train riding Brussels parasites" you will simply have to hire more gravy train riding London parasites.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement