If we vote for Brexit what happens

Fella

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Vast swathes of Labour core electorate voted to leave. Corbyn read that factor correctly. By only reluctantly making an appearance at the end of the campaigns. He made a shrewd choice.

I'm not so sure about him being shrewd there tbh. I agree he knew Labour had a lot of vote leavers. However I think he thought he could get away with doing the bare minimum & Remain would still win, thus giving him the win-win of Labour-Remainers being happy and Labour-Leavers not being overly aggrieved with him. But in fact he misjudged the situation & Leave won, meaning that the half of Labour that voted Remain is incensed with his general lack of any effort whatsoever to get behind the Remain vote.

As with everything he does, rather than be "a new kind of politics", it's an old kind of politics, done badly.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

so you genuinely believe that the lack of (skilled) labour doesn't increase the price employers are willing to pay
and the excess of labour doesn't decrease the price

if supply and demand for laboour has no effect on price, why then doesn't everyone earn exactly the same

If there was an excess of labour unemployment wouldn't have fallen dramatically for the last few years and wages last year would not have risen by 2% above inflation

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

If there was an excess of labour unemployment wouldn't have fallen dramatically for the last few years and wages last year would not have risen by 2% above inflation

so you do agree that supply and demand for labour in the UK determines the wage levels

Thrugelmir

mwpt wrote: »

Which part was hard to understand about my post that led you to believe that this is the way I feel about immigration? Are you resorting to troll tactics of purposely misinterpreting posts? That would be a shame.

You expressed a view which wasn't a topic raised during the debate prior to the vote. I therefore assumed it to be personal as a consequence.

Crashy_Time

glasgowdan wrote: »

Crash in "fails to provide any evidence that the perpetual mistakes he's still making will pay off" shocker. You'll be an old man by the time you realise.

I realised a long time ago that owing a bank a massive amount of money for accommodation is not the route to happiness.

Riggyman

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I realised a long time ago that owing a bank a massive amount of money for accommodation is not the route to happiness.

My god, that's where all of us with mortgages have been going wrong all these years!
Better spread the word.
Oh no, I bought my car with a low interest personal loan too, best sell it, eliminate that debt and my ability to go to work!

iantojones40

Riggyman wrote: »

My god, that's where all of us with mortgages have been going wrong all these years!
Better spread the word.
Oh no, I bought my car with a low interest personal loan too, best sell it, eliminate that debt and my ability to go to work!

... and herein lies the problem, being a debt junkie was, at one time, a source of shame and embarrassment, proof of someone being financially incompetent and fe ckless... now thanks to current fiscal policy it's just a normal and acceptable way of living.

vivatifosi

gfplux wrote: »

It's not my job to defend Mr Juncker, he is perfectly capable of doing that himself when he can be bothered. What many like about the man is his straight talking. That is not the normal Politiciens approach and while making many enemies he has sufficient "friends" to be sitting in a very powerful chair.
Considering two statements (I take it you are quoting directly from the original language he spoke in. Links please.) from him in isolation proves nothing but that he has a sense of humour.
A little like the quote spoken in English when referring to Brexit just after the referendum "The divorce will not be easy, it was always a difficult marriage"

The original comments were in French, but are fair translations. I can't easily cut and paste on this device but the original was from Le Monde. The other he said parce que c'est France which I believe means because it is France. I don't think anything was lost in translation.

If someone can prove to me that Juncker spent more time speaking positively about the UK than negatively I could be willing to cut him more slack. Though as the Politico article that I quoted from showed, he is lacking in many areas, not just his attitude to the UK.

He may have been great as a leader in Luxembourg, but it's hard to see that as the case in the EU. He failed to understand the mood music in the UK and to provide adequate concessions, yet is happy to turn a blind eye when other countries break rules. He is partly responsible for the UK leaving the EU and should realise his shortcomings rather than making yet more snide comments about the UK. As a diplomat, he should use diplomatic language.

Knicknack

I've become a debt junkie. After years of saving frugally I realised that the cost of borrowing was never so cheap.

mwpt

Thrugelmir wrote: »

You expressed a view which wasn't a topic raised during the debate prior to the vote. I therefore assumed it to be personal as a consequence.

No, sorry, I saw through your attempt. Please don't resort to stuff like that.