Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Thrugelmir

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

I believe the bail out fund owes the UK about £22 billion. I very much doubt they could find the money to bail out Italy, or Portugal.

That's what the markets appear to believe as well. Have a fixed exchange rate isn't helpfull in these circumstances.

Arklight

cogito wrote: »

Out of curiosity, I would like to know why there are half a million undocumented illegal immigrants in Italy if it's so easy for them to leave. Where are they going and how are they getting there?

Maybe they like it there. I know it’s hard for any of you to imagine anyone wanting to live in the hell of Europe when they could paddle themselves to England in a bathtub, to live in a bed sit in Slough, milking our benefits system for ever £32.86 a week it's worth, but there you go.

antrobus

Herzlos wrote: »

Have you done much negotiation? It is much easier to do when you know exactly what you want and provide a united front.

The SNP white paper spells out exactly what they want and the party is behind it.
MY or whoever is negotiating is now doesn't know what they want and there's open revolt about it, so no hope of unity.

It might suffer the same fate as a Scotland’s Place in Europe from December 2016? Did that not spell out exactly what the SNP wanted and that the party was behind it?

At the heart of the paper is a Norway-style framework to maintain Scotland’s place within the single market – even if the rest of the UK opts for a hard Brexit – by becoming a full or associate member of the European Free Trade Association (Efta) and thereafter becoming party to Efta’s European Economic Area (EAA) agreement.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/20/nicola-sturgeon-make-scotlands-place-in-single-market-integral-to-talks

Tiny problem, only sovereign states can be considered for EFTA membership. I'm not so sure what to make of a party too stupid to even use Google to look up EFTA’s rules.

In any case, setting out a negotiation position when there is nothing to negotiate is simply an exercise in pure propaganda. The SNP has no independence to negotiate in the same way as it has nothing to negotiate over Europe.

P.S have you found that shelf yet?

antrobus

Arklight wrote: »

Maybe they like it there. I know it’s hard for any of you to imagine anyone wanting to live in the hell of Europe when they could paddle themselves to England in a bathtub, to live in a bed sit in Slough, milking our benefits system for ever £32.86 a week it's worth, but there you go.

They seem to prefer trying to jump in the back of lorries. And I think the benefit rate for over 25 singletons is £73.10.

And Slough is nowhere near as bad as Bracknell. But then again, both are a lot better than anywhere in Syria.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

antrobus wrote: »

I think the benefit rate for over 25 singletons is £73.10..

Not for asylum seekers. (as in those from Syria you mention)

It's £37 a week.... plus a bed in a shared accommodation, hostel or bedsit.
https://www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Anyway, back to Wrexit...

Latest NatCen survey overseen by Prof John Curtice has...

Remain 59%
Leave 41%

Arklight

Brexit is crumbling.

The Tories are crumbling.

Theresa May has no mandate and no clue.

buglawton

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Anyway, back to Wrexit...

Latest NatCen survey overseen by Prof John Curtice has...

Remain 59%
Leave 41%

Taking EU sabre-rattling seriously 59%
Still confident in their original position 41%
Don't knows 0% (really? Shurely shome mishtake)

cogito

Arklight wrote: »

Maybe they like it there. I know it’s hard for any of you to imagine anyone wanting to live in the hell of Europe when they could paddle themselves to England in a bathtub, to live in a bed sit in Slough, milking our benefits system for ever £32.86 a week it's worth, but there you go.

You post this drivel after accusing wunferall of knowing nothing about immigration thereby confirming that you know even less

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Remain had nothing to be positive about. Tusk's message (via the meeting with Cameron in January 2016) had already set the tone pre referendum. What many people thought was the case, was unequivocally confirmed.

True, but that just lead to a situation in which the Brexit advocates have to deliver. The tragedy was a lack of statesmanship from both sides. It was always going to be close. Had remain won we would have chugged along as before with Cameron continually saying "the decision has been made we must move on". But the Brexit side would have continued to chip away at the EU's limitations. By winning the Brexit side now has to deliver what people wanted. But as the problems come to the fore (and yes as the Remain side chips away at the lack of progress) the Brexit side's inability to solve all the problems they promised will make Brexit seem like a failure to a lot of people.