Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

kabayiri

andrewf75 wrote: »

Sums it all up. The very people so vocal about the problems of immigration from Africa and elsewhere are the ones who think we have no role to play in solving the underlying problems! And solving the underlying problems can be far more easily achieved by working together. A strong Europe has a chance of controlling it, a fractured Europe with individual countries working in their own interests doesn’t.

Europe *will* fracture IMO. It's only a matter of time. The tensions will become too great, and religion has been the cause of many conflicts, and will continue to be the future cause.

We haven't seen it like our Polish cousins have in recent history. Try going over there; have a chat to them; it's interesting listening.

andrewf75

kabayiri wrote: »

I care what happens now and in the future, not the past.

Its not about guilt over the past. Exploitation of Africa is still going on now. China is the worst offender, but we are certainly not innocent. I just can’t really comprehend such a narrow minded view. The world is very interconnected and we have far more than our fair share of the worlds wealth so it is our duty to help and it’s in our own interests anyway even if you don’t think it is!
No-one is talking about apportioning blame to certain countries, just the whole world pulling together to do their bit.

kabayiri

Tromking wrote: »

That’s a bit of historical revisionism you’re guilty of there. France and Germany jealousy guard their joint preeminence in all things EU, and when push came to shove the U.K. was always a junior partner and shut out. Even when arch-europhile Blair was our PM, he was left under no illusion during EU get togethers that it was a Franco-German party he was trying to gatecrash. With that dynamic at play for 40 years, Brexit was inevitable.

The introduction of the Euro was a precursor to creating a 2 tier EU.

It was never the end of change, merely the beginning.

We were destined to be in the outside tier and they know it.

andrewf75

Tromking wrote: »

That’s a bit of historical revisionism you’re guilty of there. France and Germany jealousy guard their joint preeminence in all things EU, and when push came to shove the U.K. was always a junior partner and shut out. Even when arch-europhile Blair was our PM, he was left under no illusion during EU get togethers that it was a Franco-German party he was trying to gatecrash. With that dynamic at play for 40 years, Brexit was inevitable.

You can't call a different view historical revisionism! If your view was established fact we wouldn't be having a debate about Brexit, we'd all be on the leave side! What evidence is there of us being shut out of anything? We shut ourselves out by not wanting to play a full part. It was our choice.

andrewf75

kabayiri wrote: »

Europe *will* fracture IMO. It's only a matter of time. The tensions will become too great, and religion has been the cause of many conflicts, and will continue to be the future cause.

We haven't seen it like our Polish cousins have in recent history. Try going over there; have a chat to them; it's interesting listening.

History suggests you will be right, but that’s a bit defeatist. The future doesn’t have to be like the past, hence the whole point of setting up the EU after the 2nd world war. If Europe does fracture again as you say, then history is quite likely to blame us this time.

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

I'm not sure, since we caused a lot of it (historically, the British Empire was horrible), we have some moral duty to try and help.


I'm sure it could have been handled better, but I'm glad at least someone in power in the West felt human enough to help out refugees from a war we're not entirely innocent in. It's almost shameful how the UK ignored the issue beyond complaining about a wave of migrants. How many refugees did we actually take?

The British Empire also did quite a few things that it can be proud of unlike the Belgians who were brutal almost beyond belief in the Congo. And what about the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Germans, Dutch and Italians? Were they not horrible too or was it only the Brits?

Regarding refugees that we actually took, we set up camps for them in safe places which was far more practical and sensible than anything that Germany did.

kabayiri

cogito wrote: »

The British Empire also did quite a few things that it can be proud of unlike the Belgians who were brutal almost beyond belief in the Congo. And what about the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Germans, Dutch and Italians? Were they not horrible too or was it only the Brits?

Regarding refugees that we actually took, we set up camps for them in safe places which was far more practical and sensible than anything that Germany did.

I don't buy into this shame argument one bit.

Merkel's actions have solved nothing. The EU own figures suggested 60% of the intake had nothing to do with refugee status whatsoever. There was no possibility of them vetting the hundreds and thousands who came in. If Germany subsequently shifts right in the years to come (it has been known) then these people will scatter throughout EU land, and nobody will have planned for it.

Err, great job Merkel. You make Cameron look like some brilliant strategist, and that's not a compliment.

cogito

Moby wrote: »

Those articles are about the detail of accession and are complaints about the fact that it is not happening or the EU is backsliding on commitments and as the first one says:-


'Hope of a future life within EU borders was the only thing that silenced the nationalist and separatist tendencies in the Balkans that erupted when the former Yugoslavia collapsed in the 1990s.'


My view is the EU is the only way we have of dealing with these issues; the fact that it is currently failing is not a reason for us to leave thereby weakening it further as an institution. We need to strengthen it and acknowledge what it has already achieved.
The reason it is not working as it should is because of nationalist tendancies in member states!

None of the candidate countries remotely comply with the Copenhagen criteria so unless the EU abandons them, nothing will happen any time soon. And why should it? Romania and Bulgaria are riddled with corruption and their human rights record hardly stand up to scrutiny and Hungary is rowing backwards furiously. The EU has enough on its plate already without fast tracking countries whose top priority seems to be how much money they can get.

And the EU are on record as saying that they will not admit any country which has a territorial dispute with its neighbours. They don't want a repeat of the Gulf of Piran dispute.

andrewf75

cogito wrote: »

The British Empire also did quite a few things that it can be proud of unlike the Belgians who were brutal almost beyond belief in the Congo. And what about the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Germans, Dutch and Italians? Were they not horrible too or was it only the Brits?

Surely when people say “we” in this kind of debate they mean we in the wider sense as in the rich countries of the world. No-one is singling out the UK, but we can only control or influence what we do so that’s what we focus on. But I guess there are always two types of people – those who focus on what we can do to make things better and those who point at others.

Joan_number_1_2

Backbiter wrote: »

2. While we pay some £8 billion net each year, we get a significant amount back in farming subsidies and various grants to boost infrastructure in poorer area, and we get back at least £127 billion from trade.

More hogwash and it demonstrates perfectly how you and those who thanked you completely fail to understand the truth.

Even Fullfact accept the net figure after subsidies & grants as being £8.5 billion net per year and rising.
£127 billion from trade?
Well well well, it seems from your thinking that the UK did no trade before joining the Common Market and that we as a country could not have continued to do so without becoming a member.
Presumably every country outside the EU doesn't trade effectively, or like we didn't manage for centuries before perhaps.

Backbiter wrote: »

I'm sure I don't need to reiterate the point that ending frictionless trade threatens to turn Kent into a car park, which will also hinder tourists' access to the EU and threatens food and medical supplies too, as I'm sure you're aware of that.
In my view, to throw all that away is a destructive act of insanity.

You do know that over half our imports come from outside the EU, don't you?
So show us the "car parks" and hindered tourists from that, please.

The "destructive act of insanity" was in allowing the EU's powers over the UK to increase to such an extent that over half the electorate decided that it was too much and wanted out.