The EU: IN or OUT?

Ballard

uk1 wrote: »

So what is the significance of the move to try and replace Junckers do you believe?

Jeff

I don't know. Do you?

uk1

Ballard wrote: »

I don't know. Do you?

CLUE: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/eu-commission-president-juncker-under-fire-a-1098232.html

This was written in Der Spiegel the week before brexit and provides some insight into the Juncker issue.
Jeff

Dird

cloud_dog wrote: »

You sure it wasn't the Greeks responsibility for taking on the ridiculous debt arrangement/swap?

Doesn't seem to stop people blaming banks for the credit crisis rather than people borrowing more than they knew they could really afford

doe808

Nigel Farage stepping back now and avoiding the hospital pass

Next host of top gear, anyone?

JohnRo

Dird wrote: »

Doesn't seem to stop people blaming banks for the credit crisis rather than people borrowing more than they knew they could really afford

It works both ways, the banks provided the credit and encouraged those taking it to do so. They rightly take the blame for creating the situation, not those borrowing.

The systemic failure wasn't caused by borrowing itself, it was caused by collusion with ratings agencies and unscrupulous bankers driven by greed. Profiteering from steaming piles of garbage debt given false ratings and then sold as something shiny to others for premium prices.

Ballard

uk1 wrote: »

CLUE: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/eu-commission-president-juncker-under-fire-a-1098232.html

This was written in Der Spiegel the week before brexit and provides some insight into the Juncker issue.
Jeff

I'm actually very busy at the moment but scanned through it briefly. I didn't notice anything in there about movement of people. Is it there or is something else relevant there?

I'm allowing myself to get distracted from something far more important and will try not to check this site again for a couple of hours.

bigadaj

JohnRo wrote: »

It works both ways, the banks provided the credit and encouraged those taking it to do so. They rightly take the blame for creating the situation, not those borrowing.

The systemic failure wasn't caused by borrowing itself, it was caused by collusion with ratings agencies and unscrupulous bankers driven by greed. Profiteering from steaming piles of garbage debt given false ratings and then sold as something shiny to others for premium prices.

And we can't forget Goldman Sachs work in producing the 'right' result for Greek entry into the euro.

For Greece specifically then a soft default with exclusion from the euro would no doubt have been far better for the vast majority of the population, just look around the world in the relatively recent past from Argentina to Russia many countries have defaulted and been pborrowing again at near prime rates within a few years.

uk1

Ballard wrote: »

I'm actually very busy at the moment but scanned through it briefly. I didn't notice anything in there about movement of people. Is it there or is something else relevant there?

I'm allowing myself to get distracted from something far more important and will try not to check this site again for a couple of hours.

Yes ... odd that ... and nothing about the Luddites you mentioned either. It's probably irrelevant then.



Jeff

BananaRepublic

nicknameless wrote: »

'Spin' versus outright lying and scaremongering? Remain 'span' and exaggerated claims and predictions they could not substantiate, and made a few threats along the way. Poorly judged a lot of it, but essentially they didn't have a really good blue touch paper to light. Leave blatantly and clearly lied about a number of things to pander to a very specific audience. They saw the blue touch paper/s they required, doused it/them with petrol, and lobbed in an incendiary device. Neither do I condone, and a Campbell apologist I am not, but the abiding narrative of the leave campaign was jingoistic, divisive and at times the lowest of the low.

Then we must be consuming different news stories. I was shocked at the nastiness of the remain campaign, calling leavers little Englanders, xenophobes, racists, wishing to hide away from the world, against workers rights, against foreigners, against minority groups. I think that is because they had nothing positive to say hence the negative attacks. And after the leave vote, it got nastier, with some abusing leavers as uneducated, stupid people, and others attacking older people, saying they were a few years away from dying, but had destroyed the future of the young, really really nasty stuff.

What lies came from leavers? The £350 million a day claim was false, but the amount is large, so really the point that we contribute a lot is true. (In truth we'll end up paying a fee to trade, ho hum.) I did not hear nasty stuff or lies from the mainstream leavers, doubtless some fringe types said unpleasant things. But frankly the leave message was swamped by the massive nastiness from the remainers. I am still astonished at how nasty many remainers are still being.

nicknameless wrote: »

There are some very clearly reasoned and articulated leave positions in this thread. Perfectly laudable and whether you agree or not they have to be given respect. It was not those positions that won the day though.

You know that do you? People I spoke to at work expressed balanced views. I suspect most people felt insufficiently knowledgeable, but made a decision on fairly mild reasons e.g. sovereignty, working with Europe, a love of humanity, a love of freedom and so on.

Ballard

uk1 wrote: »

Yes ... odd that ... and nothing about the Luddites you mentioned either. It's probably irrelevant then.



Jeff

1. Please quote me mentioning anything about Luddites.
2. How about not accusing me of lying about being busy.
3. Please copy and paste the bit about Merkel no longer wanting free movement of citizens.

You really are getting tiresome with your posts.