Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

BobQ

vivatifosi wrote: »

:rotfl:Overheard in Waitrose is always in English.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/floperry/of-the-most-middle-class-things-overheard-at-waitrose?utm_term=.pt69L3EEv#.dm9w0Addj

Its amazing how many people think that people speaking their first language in shops means that they cannot speak English.

When I go to the EU with other Brits I too converse with them in English.

LHW99

So it's probably not eu money and you'd still ha e to be in the eu to spend it.

But not necessarily in France - and unless there are very tight conditions, using euros to buy dollars to send home would presumably be possible. EU citizens manage to convert £'s into euros to send home after all.

BobQ

Regarding the debate above about "the war". Its really time to stop this thinking. The war ended over 70 years ago and there are few alive with direct experience of it. War is horrible and as my strapline below states, its difficult for those affected by it to avoid perpetuating their prejudices about it. The average soldier on either side was not a fanatic and most had little choice but to volunteer or be conscripted. We should remember their efforts but trying to attribute motives to the attitudes of their children serves little purpose in my view and applying that to the present Brexit debate is not helpful

.

Enterprise_1701C

BobQ wrote: »

Its amazing how many people think that people speaking their first language in shops means that they cannot speak English.

When I go to the EU with other Brits I too converse with them in English.

So when they get to the till and still do not speak English when trying to argue over something with the cashier, they are simply being plain rude?

If they are capable of speaking English, then why do they request interpreters and translated documents, are they just trying to be a nuisance?

To my mind this should apply to anyone that comes to live in this country, and it really annoys me that Nepalese men of a certain generation do not allow their women to learn English in order to stop them mixing outside of their group. And we were told this by more than one Nepali.

I still believe that it is not unreasonable that we require that people that come to this country to live should learn to speak English. I do not know the legal situation on this, but I would imagine if we refused to provide interpreters to eu citizens the eu would have something to say about it.

It has always been my belief that if you go to live in another country you should live as they do, and that includes learning the language. And yes, even on holiday, I make the attempt to start learning the language.

Arklight

BobQ wrote: »

Regarding the debate above about "the war". Its really time to stop this thinking. The war ended over 70 years ago and there are few alive with direct experience of it. War is horrible and as my strapline below states, its difficult for those affected by it to avoid perpetuating their prejudices about it. The average soldier on either side was not a fanatic and most had little choice but to volunteer or be conscripted. We should remember their efforts but trying to attribute motives to the attitudes of their children serves little purpose in my view and applying that to the present Brexit debate is not helpful

.

Considering Brexit is so closely related to atavistic prejudice, xenophobia, and English exceptionalism, I think framing things in the context of the last two wars is entirely appropriate.


The fact that Britain's imperial adventures went a good way towards causing them, and that we wouldn't have been on the winning side of either of them without France and Russia appears to be somewhat absent from the Brexit canon however.

Honey_Badger

Arklight wrote: »

Considering Brexit is so closely related to atavistic prejudice, xenophobia, and English exceptionalism, I think framing things in the context of the last two wars is entirely appropriate.


The fact that Britain's imperial adventures went a good way towards causing them, and that we wouldn't have been on the winning side of either of them without France and Russia appears to be somewhat absent from the Brexit canon however.

What a complete misrepresentation of the causes of both world wars.

The contribution and cost that this country made to the freedom of Europe seems to be totally downplayed by the pro-EU contingent on here.

I also notice whilst you make valid reference to Russia's role in both wars, you fail to mention the US's role. Bias or what?

Tromking

Honey_Badger wrote: »

The contribution and cost that this country made to the freedom of Europe seems to be totally downplayed by the pro-EU contingent on here.

It would be.
To remind the average remain voter of the similarities between the UK standing alone against mainland European fascism in 1939 and swimming against the tide against mainland European federalism with Brexit grates a bit.

Arklight

Honey_Badger wrote: »

What a complete misrepresentation of the causes of both world wars.

The contribution and cost that this country made to the freedom of Europe seems to be totally downplayed by the pro-EU contingent on here.

I also notice whilst you make valid reference to Russia's role in both wars, you fail to mention the US's role. Bias or what?

In one of Hitler's speeches he said, "Why should 40 million Englishmen have an empire and 60 millions Germans shouldn't?"


Britain's commitment to spreading freedom was pretty absent from most people who were born with a brown faces' lives (or savages, to use the parlance of the day) until England found someone else's imperialism knocking at its door.


It was the French that bore the brunt of WW1 and the Russians who won the ground war in WW2. In no possible scenario can France capitulate in WW1 and Russia capitulate in WW2 and leave anything other than defeat for the UK.


The US, which waited a good long time in both wars to check it was joining the winning side, would never have joined either war and would have remained a regional power.

Tromking

From my recollection Germany declared war on the US in WW2.
I’m not sure anyone denies the pivotal actions and sacrifice of other nations in the 20th century conflicts. The contention however that the UK would have lost both world wars without help, doesn’t negate the sacrifice the UK and its people made.

BobQ

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

So when they get to the till and still do not speak English when trying to argue over something with the cashier, they are simply being plain rude?

If they are capable of speaking English, then why do they request interpreters and translated documents, are they just trying to be a nuisance?

To my mind this should apply to anyone that comes to live in this country, and it really annoys me that Nepalese men of a certain generation do not allow their women to learn English in order to stop them mixing outside of their group. And we were told this by more than one Nepali.

I still believe that it is not unreasonable that we require that people that come to this country to live should learn to speak English. I do not know the legal situation on this, but I would imagine if we refused to provide interpreters to eu citizens the eu would have something to say about it.

It has always been my belief that if you go to live in another country you should live as they do, and that includes learning the language. And yes, even on holiday, I make the attempt to start learning the language.

I agree that it is not unreasonable that we require that people that come to this country to live should learn to speak English. I was just pointing out that speaking to each other in their mother tongue is not itself rude, its what most of us do when speaking to friends and family when abroad together.

I agree that people should not expect those serving the UK public to converse with them in a language other than English. While this applies to those resident here we should not have the same expectations of their friends and family visiting them in the UK.

That said your comments suggest an antagonistic attitude to foreigners and a lack of sympathy for those who struggle to use a foreign language.