Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

cogito

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

If you want to put moral obligations on countries because of the past you can't stop two of three generations ago because there's reasons in the deeper past for what happened, and so it goes in perpetuity.

How long has the eu had the embargo on admitting countries with territorial disputes btw? Just I can think of a few that should not have beed admitted under those circumstances.

Since February this year.

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201802061061407537-slovenia-border-croatia-dispute-eu/

Tromking

Moby wrote: »

Tromking you fail to acknowledge that after the war the UK was in prime spot to be at the centre of re-shaping Europe. We were victorious but broke, France had been occupied and Germany was defeated. Instead of taking reponsibility for the future of Europe however we decided to pre-occupy ourselves with our Empire and we left the French and Germans to crack on with the project. That is why we lost influence! Ardenauer and De Gaulle never thought we were serious about Europe and therefore went ahead without us. When we joined we were therefore always catching up.

I've acknowledged the Franco-German right to 'boss things' as regards the EU on more than one occasion here, what I won't acknowledge is that there has always been a place at the top table for the UK if only we acted differently toward our continent. Its a tad insulting to suggest that the UK did not take responsibility for Europe's future when we were a key part of the alliance that faced down the threat of the Soviet Union and won the cold war. In so far as were pre-occupied with Empire, that actually entailed the UK at the behest of the US in jettisoning our role as a colonial power. What will I concede is that the UK has never quite understood that the EU project was borne out of a Franco-German desire to end their periodic need to slaughter each other on an industrial scale.
The over riding simple fact is that Britons are suspicious of the federal endgame of the European project, the UK knows it and more importantly continental Europe knows it. France and Germany were never going to give up or dilute any part of their influence to a nation with that mindset.
Cameron called it a few years back when against the wishes of several smaller nations led by the UK, Merkel pushed for the selection of arch-federalist Juncker as President of the EU Commission and it resulted in another all to predictable humiliation for a UK Prime Minister. The usual suspects in Brussels revelled in that humiliation and Cameron quite rightly announced that that Juncker's appointment would not go down well with the British electorate. A few months later we voted to leave.
Brexit was inevitable.

Joan_number_1_2

andrewf75 wrote: »

There was, because you seem to have ignored many key aspects and then accused others of not understanding!

No.
You can't possibly discuss every aspect of such a topic on a site like this because each post would be pages long.
P.S. : It's you that accused me of not understanding because I didn't digress enough for your liking.
In other words you don't understand that I am not misunderstanding because of something that was not discussed.

andrewf75 wrote: »

No. We are choosing to not only leave the EU, but leave the single market and customs union. The consequences of that are down to our choices. Blaming the EU is ridiculous.

It was very obvious that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market but other countries have a customs arrangement with the EU, don't they?
If the problems weren't there before but they are now for EU members only then it very clearly is the fault of the EU.
See if you can name any other global organisation where you are encouraged to join but can't leave without such problems?
It demonstrates the EU mindset perfectly TBH, not having any system in place for any member that might want to leave; they are so confident of their vision for ever-closer integration that they cannot (or rather could not) imagine anyone ever wanting to leave.
Now they perpetuate the myth of difficulty purely to dissuade others who might in future want to leave.
The only reason for possible border difficulties is because of the EU's insistence.
Porous borders weren't a problem for millions of "refugees", and borders don't seem to have made the EU's trade with Russia difficult do they?
To put it very bluntly it looks very much like the EU are pooping themselves at what direction other member countries will take.
Hungary, Poland and Italy just for a few examples.

Arklight

Tromking wrote: »

I've acknowledged the Franco-German right to 'boss things' as regards the EU on more than one occasion here, what I won't acknowledge is that there has always been a place at the top table for the UK if only we acted differently toward our continent. Its a tad insulting to suggest that the UK did not take responsibility for Europe's future when we were a key part of the alliance that faced down the threat of the Soviet Union and won the cold war. In so far as were pre-occupied with Empire, that actually entailed the UK at the behest of the US in jettisoning our role as a colonial power. What will I concede is that the UK has never quite understood that the EU project was borne out of a Franco-German desire to end their periodic need to slaughter each other on an industrial scale.
The over riding simple fact is that Britons are suspicious of the federal endgame of the European project, the UK knows it and more importantly continental Europe knows it. France and Germany were never going to give up or dilute any part of their influence to a nation with that mindset.
Cameron called it a few years back when against the wishes of several smaller nations led by the UK, Merkel pushed for the selection of arch-federalist Juncker as President of the EU Commission and it resulted in another all to predictable humiliation for a UK Prime Minister. The usual suspects in Brussels revelled in that humiliation and Cameron quite rightly announced that that Juncker's appointment would not go down well with the British electorate. A few months later we voted to leave.
Brexit was inevitable.

Where does this utter nonsense come from?

The UK's imperial aspirations were humiliatingly crushed by a single phone call from Eisenhower during the Suez Crisis. Our allies during this adventure, the French, realised there was no chance of any European countries opposing the US other than as a bloc and committed to the EU.

Considering the estimated deaths caused by the British Empire's brutal invasion of countries that never wanted it and couldn't wait to see the back of it, runs into millions, you should perhaps be more aware of your own country's, often disgraceful, role in history.

Europe bent over backwards to give the UK preferential treatment within the bloc. The UK has never once exercised the substantial immigration powers it has within the EU so of course Cameron's Daily Mail trip was a failure.

"The over riding fact" if there is one, is that very slightly more than half of Britons need to use their brains a bit more, and their ignorant knee jerk prejudices less, when they are in the polling booth.

mrginge

So much hatred arklight. Have you considered counselling?

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

And the alternative, isolationism, is keeping the economic power away from the hands of a relatively small elite?


Globalization is generally a breaking down of barriers, so we can spend less time/money/effort dealing with barriers. That little of that money will make it to the poor isn't part of globalization. The lower the bar is on things like trade, the easier it is for the little people to trade themselves instead of the power being with the larger companies.

Such naivety. Make yourself a cup of tea and sit down and read this.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/14/globalisation-the-rise-and-fall-of-an-idea-that-swept-the-world

Lungboy

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

While some of that trade is under EU trade agreements, most of it is not and you really ought to check before jumping.

Except that it is.

Tromking

mrginge wrote: »

So much hatred arklight. Have you considered counselling?

Are you going to tell arklight about French imperialist excesses in North Africa and Indo-China or shall I?

ukcarper

Lungboy wrote: »

Except that it is.

Is it that 54% includes EU states which accounts for 44 of that 54, so 56% of our exports go to non EU countries of which less than one fifth goes to countries with EU trade deals.

Backbiter

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

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.

The electoral commission reported that the size of the electorate on referendum day was 46,500,001, and 72.1 per cent of that turned out to vote.

17.4 million is not "over half of the electorate". It's over a third, I'll grant you, but it's less than two fifths.