EU-BREXIT - Page 311 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15054793
B0ycey wrote:FYI Scotland would have the same deal as the rest of the EU outside the UK if a deal is made between us and they join up. This isn't about deals but respect. I agree there is a financial penalty for their independence but what you suggest is beyond the pale. And no I don't think ignoring the problem means that Westminster hold the cards. It just delays the problem and makes dissenting voice grow which over time may become violent. Plus a referendum isn't binary. You can give them the referendum and only grant independence once a WA satisfies both sides and make that clear from the offset that the rest of the UK needs to be considered too. Also you think the UK doesn't need Scotland or something? Where are those blasted subs going for a start.


Well, Scotland wanting it's own freedom, independence(not if the E.U accepted them), would face exactly the same issues as the rest of the U,K on leaving the E.U.

Unlike Eire, where the North could, on independence, join them in the E.U, without a border with the U.K, Scotland would face a real border with England, for which we would, like the E.U-NI, expect proper customs checks, along with passport controls, as well as possible tariffs, otherwise the E.U would flood England & Wales with migrants or goods etc.

We do not have to do anything about a W.A with Scotland, like the U.K leaving the E.U, it is the 'Leaving' party that has to clear up the residual issues such as debt & all the other things.
Scotland would owe the U.K a vast amount of money relatively speaking, we would not expect them to get off 'Scott free' on that issue, as for our subs, they would return south & we would shut down the shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness just to reinforce the point.

As with any reunification between the two halves of Ireland, the North would lose the Block Grant, AKA, the BARNETT Formula, for which it's economy, like Scotland were it to join the E.U, would need support from the E.U, which is already under a lot of strain economically itself.

England will not 'reward' either of those two countries were they to achieve some notional independence short term, why would we, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever, it's that reality that both of those countries would have to face,. of which N. Ireland would probably have some advantage over Scotland on that score, whereas Scotland would be isolated from it's immediate neighbour, physically & politically.

I personally do not see Scotland achieving separation from England, once the reality that such an event would cost the people of Scotland, they will reject it.

It's for that reason that we should allow an indyref 2, pointing out the full consequences that will immediately follow that decision & let the people decide.

When you listen to what the SNP are saying, STURGEON is correct on the point she is making, that the people of Scotland have a right to decide their position in\out of the U,K, it's just that, as the SNP accuse the Tories of lying about the effects of Brexit, so too are the SNP not revealing the consequences of the SNP crusade to the Scottish people.
By B0ycey
#15054828
I suspect the subs would already be in England if it were possible actually as they are contentious in Scotland. We do not have deep enough waters apparently.

Nonetheless for once I agree with some of your points @Nonsense. Although if you are sure Scotland would reject independence when everything is explained to them in fine detail, wouldn't the sensible approach be to just give them another referendum to quash this question for a generation rather than stoke patriotism with contempt? Especially if you agree to self determination.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15054830
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Corporation tax is less than 10% of the total tax take and the relationship between tax levels and tax income is not really straightforward. At any rate, tax cuts have been put on hold for now, but it makes good sense for the UK to not rule out a reduction, especially considering the EU's worries about it and Ireland's tax policy.

Generally, public services are overwhelmingly financed by taxes on income and consumption. If people want more of them, they'll have to make the case to the middle class in particular, and especially in Anglo-Saxon countries neither the right nor the left seems to be prepared to do so.


At the time of the Scottish referendum, the first was true and the second likely. I don't think we can assume that people knew what would happen in the future.


Ireland is definately a problem not just for the UK but for the EU also. The issue is not only corporate wealth tax but also income tax in one form or the other.

As for the UK, as much as i see it. If Brexit goes bad then UK will need to compensate for lack of competitivness with lower taxes. If Brexit goes good then UK will anyways slash taxes because the Tories are in charge, highly likely NHS will be semi privitized by the looks of it and other more closed sectors will be opened for international capital. I understand that some treat this as a boogeyman of sorts but it is just the reality of international trade deals. Not all that I said is perhaps economically bad but usually it does imply decreasing taxation.

I am not asking UK to pay more taxes but keep the taxation burden more or less the same. Over the years, most countries in the EU established a parity in this regard of sorts. There are some violators like Ireland but we are trying to deal with them.

Why the smaller taxation in UK is a problem for the EU? Well, it will basically be used as a tax haven by European companies. This is irrelevant of Britain doing good or bad from Brexit. In principle, this is everything that Brexit itself stands against.

As for Scotland, well, do you think saying that the nobody knew the future at that time actually makes them less angry? I mean, as much as Scotland sees it, they were taken for a ride, lied to and then their opinion was discarded. It is one of the reasons why the SNP can ask for a 2nd referendum without any re-precautions in Scotland itself. SNP is only gaining additional popularity with this. (In Scotland)
User avatar
By Godstud
#15054831
So now that BJ is PM, this Brexit will be over really soon, right?


:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15054837
B0ycey wrote:I suspect the subs would already be in England if it were possible actually as they are contentious in Scotland. We do not have deep enough waters apparently.

Nonetheless for once I agree with some of your points @Nonsense. Although if you are sure Scotland would reject independence when everything is explained to them in fine detail, wouldn't the sensible approach be to just give them another referendum to quash this question for a generation rather than stoke patriotism with contempt? Especially if you agree to self determination.


I am more than inclined to agree with you BOYcey on a second indyref, irrespective of the fact that it was acknowledged to be a 'once in a generation' event.

That's because, as STURGEON pointed out, it is for Scottish people to decide their future & Westminster shouldn't deny them.

As I said, the Scottish people should be made to feel the consequences that may arise from any decision to leave the rest of the U.K.

I have to say, IMHO, there is an element of hypocrisy with the SNP between their position on Brexit, compared to another indyref, the SNP were repeatedly saying that Scotland voted 'remain', yet, the referendum was a U.K-wide event, not local to any particular country, so, though they may be correct in stating that the majority of voters in Scotland wanted to 'Leave', so too did N. Ireland, whereas Wales voted along with England to 'Leave'.

Because it was a U.K-wide event, no single part of the country can claim privilege to direct their own affairs on that basis whilst enjoying unfettered opportunities at Westminster, to frustrate the desire of the rest of the U.K to leave.

The SNP being the face of Scotland at Westminster indulged themselves to their hearts desire in trying to thwart Brexit, yet Westminster MP's have no direct representation at Holyrood in which to return the favour over an indyref 2 result, that in essence, is a consequence encapsulated in the 'Midlothian Question', in which the MP's of the other U.K countries can vote at Westminster, yet English MP's cannot vote in the other U.K parliaments.

I think that the current government should review that situation & put it to the Commons in order that the situation is resolved.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15054856
Godstud wrote:So now that BJ is PM, this Brexit will be over really soon, right?


:lol: :lol: :lol:


In principle yes, in practice, it's an on-going story in the short medium term.

The lumpen-proletariat rejected the 'remain' option, voting their political welfare 'advisors' cum 'providers' out of contention in the election by voting for their nemesis, the Tory Party.

I can understand that totally, the party that they helped elect can take no more away from them, the Tories have been 'lent' their votes, now they have to put the money in their pockets, one way or another.

For long term fit benefit claimants, I would continue 'freezing' their benefits, whilst doing everything in my power to get them into the work ethic, raising the net income in work to a Living Wage level & reducing benefit levels at the same time, in order to square the circle in public spending on those benefits.

The employers who take on those former claimants would see reductions in taxes to compensate for paying the Living Wage for those workers & the benefit for society would eventually be a smaller state.

There were many failures of policy by Labour in the election, Tony BLAIR has waded in on the issue, yet, he fails to acknowledge that voters kicked his party out of office, precisely because it had become 'Tory' in nature & embraced the so-called 'middle-class' at the expense of betrayal of the working class.

BLAIR thinks that Labour are too far to the Left, but he is one cause of that movement away from the centre ground, due to his 'Third Way' occupation of the 'middle' ground of politics in this country.
Labour have always been too sympathetic & generous to those who have no call on the rest of society.

That's the lesson they need to take on board, I doubt that they have the balls to deal with that particular issue.
User avatar
By Kaiserschmarrn
#15054941
JohnRawls wrote:
Ireland is definately a problem not just for the UK but for the EU also. The issue is not only corporate wealth tax but also income tax in one form or the other.

As for the UK, as much as i see it. If Brexit goes bad then UK will need to compensate for lack of competitivness with lower taxes. If Brexit goes good then UK will anyways slash taxes because the Tories are in charge, highly likely NHS will be semi privitized by the looks of it and other more closed sectors will be opened for international capital. I understand that some treat this as a boogeyman of sorts but it is just the reality of international trade deals. Not all that I said is perhaps economically bad but usually it does imply decreasing taxation.

I am not asking UK to pay more taxes but keep the taxation burden more or less the same. Over the years, most countries in the EU established a parity in this regard of sorts. There are some violators like Ireland but we are trying to deal with them.

Why the smaller taxation in UK is a problem for the EU? Well, it will basically be used as a tax haven by European companies. This is irrelevant of Britain doing good or bad from Brexit. In principle, this is everything that Brexit itself stands against.

I'm aware of the concerns of all sides and while I disagree with some of the above I won't nitpick but just give you my view on this.

I think the UK should keep its options open to some extent. At the very least it should tie the debate about taxation to Ireland and basically say as long as Ireland is undermining the UK we reserve the right to respond in kind. This is especially the case with respect to NI - if NI has some sort of hybrid status it should at least reap lots of benefits from it.

If you look at taxation, size of the state, etc. the UK tends to be more similar to other Anglo-Saxon countries and this has happened without harmonisation by a central authority or so-called level playing field provisions. Overall then we should expect this to continue into the foreseeable future which means that the UK will neither become Sweden nor a dystopian hellhole out of a Dickson novel, but just stay closer in terms of these measures to, say, Canada or NZ.

The EU will try to embrace the UK as tightly as possible and the UK should try and resist with respect to being able to change its own policies in the future. I'm not saying this because of "EU red tape" or similar talking points, but I'm taking a long term view and I'm not convinced that the EU has a monopoly on wisdom in terms of good policy.

JohnRawls wrote:As for Scotland, well, do you think saying that the nobody knew the future at that time actually makes them less angry? I mean, as much as Scotland sees it, they were taken for a ride, lied to and then their opinion was discarded. It is one of the reasons why the SNP can ask for a 2nd referendum without any re-precautions in Scotland itself. SNP is only gaining additional popularity with this. (In Scotland)

I'm sure you are right that this sentiment exists and the SNP will exploit it, but in my view it's still important to note the fact that those who want Scottish independence or remain in the EU have not been deliberately deceived.

Godstud wrote:So now that BJ is PM, this Brexit will be over really soon, right?

Absolutely. The UK will no longer be an EU member which among other things means that those who wanted to block Brexit have lost and their campaign can now only be "rejoin" which is an entirely different proposition. Attention will now turn to much drier matters rather than drama in the House of Commons and in the courts and since the Tories have a sizable majority they'll be able to get things done and won't be paralysed by Brexit.
By skinster
#15054955
Godstud wrote:So now that BJ is PM, this Brexit will be over really soon, right?


:lol: :lol: :lol:


Boris is going to get Brexit done! Watch this space...

:lol:
By Rich
#15056967
The Brexiteers had one central message:

Die Zigeuner sind nicht unser Unglück

And we're not going to let them forget it. One thing the Brexiteers can forget about however, is us ever taking lectures on racism from them again.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15057062
Rich wrote:Zigeuner

The actual quote refers to the Jews.

"Die Juden sind unser Unglück!"

- Heinrich Gotthard Freiherr von Treitschke

'The Jews are our misfortune' was adopted as a motto by the Nazi publication Der Stürmer

What have 'Gypsies' got to do with Brexit or Jews and Nazis for that matter?


:eh:
By Rich
#15057067
ingliz wrote:What have 'Gypsies' got to do with Brexit or Jews and Nazis for that matter?

The threat of Britain being flooded by Romanian Gypsies was one of the great drivers of Brexit. The Brexiteers clearly implied that the Gypsies were a misfortune not an asset. On the one hand the Brexiteers argued we must escape intrinsically Nazi run Europe. The Germans are constantly criticised for their treatment of unwanted minorities, but on the other hand the Brexiteers argued we had no responsible to integrate these people. The Romainian Gypsies are not our misfortune was the essential moral argument of the Brexiteers.

My argument is that if you are going to insist on criticising the Germans for their solution to the Gypsy question in WWII, then you have a moral duty to share the economic and social burden of the more "humane" solutions.
User avatar
By Patrickov
#15057075
Rich wrote:The threat of Britain being flooded by Romanian Gypsies was one of the great drivers of Brexit. The Brexiteers clearly implied that the Gypsies were a misfortune not an asset. On the one hand the Brexiteers argued we must escape intrinsically Nazi run Europe. The Germans are constantly criticised for their treatment of unwanted minorities, but on the other hand the Brexiteers argued we had no responsible to integrate these people. The Romainian Gypsies are not our misfortune was the essential moral argument of the Brexiteers.

My argument is that if you are going to insist on criticising the Germans for their solution to the Gypsy question in WWII, then you have a moral duty to share the economic and social burden of the more "humane" solutions.


There must be plenty of ways between "allowing them flood 'our' society and take away 'our' low-end population's jobs" and "exterminating them".
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15057380
Rich wrote:The threat of Britain being flooded by Romanian Gypsies was one of the great drivers of Brexit. The Brexiteers clearly implied that the Gypsies were a misfortune not an asset. On the one hand the Brexiteers argued we must escape intrinsically Nazi run Europe. The Germans are constantly criticised for their treatment of unwanted minorities, but on the other hand the Brexiteers argued we had no responsible to integrate these people. The Romainian Gypsies are not our misfortune was the essential moral argument of the Brexiteers.

My argument is that if you are going to insist on criticising the Germans for their solution to the Gypsy question in WWII, then you have a moral duty to share the economic and social burden of the more "humane" solutions.



I have yet to know of any such threats as you allege being a reason for why people voted to leave the E.U, perhaps you could supply the 'source's' of your allegations.

Despite the campaign of project 'Fear' undertaken by Labour, Lib Dems, SNP etc, people still voted to leave, much the same as the ad hominem attacks on Boris JOHNSON, the people voted Tory, despite the attacks on him by his political enemies.

Even in the context of uncontrolled immigration, I have never heard or seen any media references to gypsies being quoted as a reason for voting to leave the E.U.

By next Thursday, the legislation will be virtually wrapped up in parliament, ready for our departure on 31 January, thereafter, the transition period will end on 31 December 2020.

Our reasons to leave the E.U need to be seen in the global context of rising nationalism, deep mistrust of global institutions such as NATO, U.N,IMF, World Bank, politicians at large, the political elite, political academics who are paid by these institutions to use their influence to uphold the status quo over the common people.

People like CORBYN, who proclaimed Labour's Manifesto as 'radical', when it was nothing of the sort, was well & truly sussed by the voters at large.

The truly radical move, was that taken by voters in the 2016 referendum, that's why I called it the Glorifica Nova (Glorious Revolution).

I think that most posters are well acquainted with German national socialist methods of 'liquidation' or genocide against the untermenschen in the countries which they occupied, to raise the issue of medieval brutality as a 'solution' to a non-existent 'problem' of the time, in the context of the Brexit process, is, if you will pardon my saying so, ludicrously absurb,

There is no 'moral duty' for any 'solution', when such suggestions are based on a comparison with anything that the German fascist did during the last war.

This country is populated beyond it's ability to support it's indigenous population, that is due to the massive immigration the country has experienced since Labour were in office & continues unabated.
That must end after this month, the government must not adopt it's pre-election proposals on future immigration, but must adopt a more rigorous regime.

That is not about discrimination against particular nationalities, it's purely about population levels that can be supported without reducing the quality of life for the indigenous people of this country over the long term.
It is not the responsibility of U.K citizens to 'integrate' with migrants, the onus is on them to do so.
By Rich
#15060753
Nonsense wrote:This country is populated beyond it's ability to support it's indigenous population,

But what do you mean by the indigenous population? Do you mean those that were born here? do you mean those whose whose grandparents or great grandparents were born here? Does race play any role in your definition of indigenous?

Why should I have solidarity with some Bradford conservative Muslim, over my Liberal European friends and intimates? This is what I never seem to get any answer for from the Brexiteers. The Brexiteers demand that I enlist to the new post Brexit patriotism. But they can never seem to tell me what the basis of this patriotism is? What are its values? What are its essential cultural elements? They seem no better at offering a serious foundation for British patriotism and nationalism than Blair's ridiculous "cool Britannia". All I get from the Brexiteers is remember the Battle of Britain. Yes I do remember it. And I remember that 15% of the kills by the RAF's (that's the Royal Air Air-force not the Red Army Faction) fighters were made by Polish and Czech pilots. I don't remember Pakistani or Somali born pilots playing much of a role.

Proportional Representation doesn't override everything, but it is pretty high on my priorities. To get to PR we need to break either the Tories or Labour. The corrupt hypocritical, self serving, duopoly that has run British politics since 1935. So it was fantastic to see Labour getting such a demoralising result in December. Just watching Carolyn Flint on Politics Live, whining about Labour's Brexit policy. Seeing that traitor to the Remain cause lose her seat was one of the pleasures of election night. Although of course nothing could beat seeing the back of Anna Soubry.

What all the commentators seem to miss is that Labour were in an impossible position. The 2 and a bit party system works in Britain (well now Britain minus Scotland) by the Labour party being more radical than the Liberal Democrats. All Labours compromises put their Brexit policy in the middle of the Tories on their right, with the Lib Dems and the SNP to their left. This was a very uncomfortable place for them to be. They were trying to be the soggy, cautious, compromise party on Brexit, while at the same being the dangerous, leap in the dark radical party of jeremy Corbyn.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15060989
The Brexit Withdrawal Agreement Bill(WAB) has now cleared the Commons, despite amendments in the Lords designed to reap minimal political' moral' capital.
As such, Royal Assent will be given in the next few days, it will then be signed off by Brussels, paving the way for making a possible trade deal with the E.U in the weeks thereafter.

The 30th June this year will be the last day in which any extension to the Transition Period can be extended by agreement, that period of transition will expire on 31 December 2020, so, either a Trade Deal will be agreed with the E.U, for which a 'new' relationship with them will begin on 1st January 2021, or(more likely), we leave without any 'Deal' on the same day.

If the latter, it will probably be on WTO basis, unless a basic two, or three stage, minimally 'neutral' alternative is agreed pending any outstanding issues standing in the way of a fuller 'deal' which may possibly be agreed with the E.U.

I do not see the U.K being a 'rule-taker', the referendum was to withdraw politically from the E.U , any legal encumbrances that would entangle the U.K to the jurisdiction of the ECJ, will not be delivering Brexit as per referendum instruction.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15060994
Nonsense wrote:it will probably be on WTO basis,

Prepare to see UK manufacturing go tits up.

Professor Patrick Minford, one of the ‘Economists for Brexit’, describes his ‘Britain Alone’ model as predicting the ‘elimination’ of UK manufacturing and a big increase in wage inequality. These outcomes may be hard to sell to UK citizens as a desirable political option.

Have fun.


:lol:
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15061004
Rich wrote:But what do you mean by the indigenous population? Do you mean those that were born here? do you mean those whose whose grandparents or great grandparents were born here? Does race play any role in your definition of indigenous?

Why should I have solidarity with some Bradford conservative Muslim, over my Liberal European friends and intimates? This is what I never seem to get any answer for from the Brexiteers. The Brexiteers demand that I enlist to the new post Brexit patriotism. But they can never seem to tell me what the basis of this patriotism is? What are its values? What are its essential cultural elements? They seem no better at offering a serious foundation for British patriotism and nationalism than Blair's ridiculous "cool Britannia". All I get from the Brexiteers is remember the Battle of Britain. Yes I do remember it. And I remember that 15% of the kills by the RAF's (that's the Royal Air Air-force not the Red Army Faction) fighters were made by Polish and Czech pilots. I don't remember Pakistani or Somali born pilots playing much of a role.

Proportional Representation doesn't override everything, but it is pretty high on my priorities. To get to PR we need to break either the Tories or Labour. The corrupt hypocritical, self serving, duopoly that has run British politics since 1935. So it was fantastic to see Labour getting such a demoralising result in December. Just watching Carolyn Flint on Politics Live, whining about Labour's Brexit policy. Seeing that traitor to the Remain cause lose her seat was one of the pleasures of election night. Although of course nothing could beat seeing the back of Anna Soubry.

What all the commentators seem to miss is that Labour were in an impossible position. The 2 and a bit party system works in Britain (well now Britain minus Scotland) by the Labour party being more radical than the Liberal Democrats. All Labours compromises put their Brexit policy in the middle of the Tories on their right, with the Lib Dems and the SNP to their left. This was a very uncomfortable place for them to be. They were trying to be the soggy, cautious, compromise party on Brexit, while at the same being the dangerous, leap in the dark radical party of jeremy Corbyn.



I mean those whom are 'native' to the British Isles Rich.

If you believe that the British Isles comprises separate 'races' of indigenous people, then yes, it would include 'race', but not in the context of the debate on population levels of today, where the population has been inflated by migration from countries outside of the British Isles.

Now, in the 1950's, when the Commonwealth was still meaningful, before the independence of our former colonies began, we allowed migration inwards, on the basis that our population needed to make good on the numbers killed in the war.

That was always a bogus argument, because, at the same time as the whinging Windrush migrants came here, heading in the opposite direction were the '£10 'Poms', over 1 MILLION of them emigrated, compared to the few tens of thousands of Windrush migrants.

Then, in the early 1970's, following entry into the EC, Europeans were entitled to come here to work only, then had to return when the work ran out.

That system worked up until the point when a rush of new treaties were agreed, which stimulated migration to a degree, but it wasn't until the E.U's single border policy, coupled with 'Third Country' migration from any country outside of the E.U, that migration to the U.K under Labour, spiralled out of control.

To myself as a 'Leaver', I never had a 'problem' with European migration within the E.U, it wasn't a 'problem' until Europe allowed unfettered travel within the E.U by 'Third Countries' across the globe, that's where & how our population problems arose.

For that reason I can sympathise with your point against ethnic groups in Bradford or elsewhere, however, when a British government allows anyone into the country for the purpose of remaining here, I would always accept that person as having a legitimate right to be here, but, I believe that migration should only be allowed on a restricted basis, not including full citizenship, either by a visa arrangement, work permit, humanitarian, or other time limited reasons.

I do not know of any reason why you think that 'patriotism' should be demanded of you in a post Brexit Britain, I am not a flag-waver, like most people in any country, the state in which they live is a birthright that needs to be protected for the future of their descendants, that has been compromised by mass migration, as competition for public services etc demonstrates.

Logically speaking, for any given voting populace, the more political parties there are, the less is the potential power, that's why dominant political parties gain power, because the accumulate more power through votes cast, the alternative is weak governance with more frequent elections, far better to have strong government that avoids situations such as ours post referendum in parliament.

'Government's' don't always win elections on the 'popular' vote, rather, they are simply elected on the basis of being the lesser of two evils, I could go into depth as to why Labour never won the election, indeed I have analysed their manifesto for that purpose, though many reasons are obvious.

Labour had choices Rich, they made the wrong one's & paid the price.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15061010
ingliz wrote:Prepare to see UK manufacturing go tits up.

Professor Patrick Minford, one of the ‘Economists for Brexit’, describes his ‘Britain Alone’ model as predicting the ‘elimination’ of UK manufacturing and a big increase in wage inequality. These outcomes may be hard to sell to UK citizens as a desirable political option.

Have fun.


:lol:


Manufacturing reached it's nadir under THATCHER, the result of post war trades union actions, though not unjustified, the Tories cannot stomach public sector unionism, which is why the Tories can always do something about that when they gain power & public sector strikes always play into Tory hands.


We already have wage 'inequality', long before Brexit appeared on the horizon.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#15061012
Nonsense wrote:Manufacturing reached it's nadir under THATCHER, the result of post war trades union actions, though not unjustified, the Tories cannot stomach public sector unionism, which is why the Tories can always do something about that when they gain power & public sector strikes always play into Tory hands.


We already have wage 'inequality', long before Brexit appeared on the horizon.

Ingliz's point is that it's going to get worse, not better. How much more of this are the British working class going to take? :eh:
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15061023
Potemkin wrote:Ingliz's point is that it's going to get worse, not better. How much more of this are the British working class going to take? :eh:


That remains to be seen, the opposite could well happen, because, if the E.U attempts to topple Britain's position in respect of the city of London, then manufacturing could well regenerate, however, manufacturing, although economically more important with Brexit, is secondary to the services sector of the economy.
I myself would like to see manufacturing rise again in this country & Brexit is the sort of stimulus that should make that happen.

The 'working class' always 'take' what's coming their way, they are survivors, whether they ever get a government that is to their liking depends on the political parties.
If you care to recall the BLAIR-BROWN government's, they betrayed, as well as abandoned the working class in favour of the middle class, which is why any 'right' wing policy direction by Labour would not gain popular traction with working class voters, who, by definition, are all of those who work for a living.
  • 1
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • 312
  • 313
  • 325

99% of communist "thought" is slander[…]

Jacinda vs ScoMo

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/fe[…]

Yes @BeesKnee5 and they are getting ripped apart[…]

Cousin to chaos

We're working on this unfortunate oversight, Comr[…]