EU-BREXIT - Page 198 - 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 Potemkin
#15011693
Beren wrote:Time for Britain to kick off its own killdozer project, and Geoffrey Cox had the honour of turning the ignition key and blowing the horn before the driver takes his seat and starts warming up the engine.


Britain's own 'Killdozer Project' began as soon as the results of the Brexit referendum came in. :)
User avatar
By Beren
#15011695
Potemkin wrote:Britain's own 'Killdozer Project' began as soon as the results of the Brexit referendum came in. :)

Sure, the British killdozer has been being built since then, but the rampage itself is just about to begin.
User avatar
By SolarCross
#15011696
Beren wrote:Time for Britain to kick off its own killdozer project, and Geoffrey Cox had the honour of turning the ignition key and blowing the horn before the driver takes his seat and starts warming up the engine.



I guess you didn't watch it. His message is optimistic not vengeful.
User avatar
By Beren
#15011699
SolarCross wrote:I guess you didn't watch it. His message is optimistic not vengeful.

I didn't watch it through indeed because it was a rather weak and boring performance, compared to my expectations and Cox's introduction especially. However, the tone of his message doesn't matter regarding his future premiership.
User avatar
By SolarCross
#15011703
Beren wrote:I didn't watch it through indeed because it was a rather weak and boring performance.

I am sure you decided that before touching the play button.
User avatar
By Beren
#15011705
SolarCross wrote:I am sure you decided that before touching the play button.

You're sure because you're projecting. :lol:
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15011706
SolarCross wrote:I guess you didn't watch it. His message is optimistic not vengeful.


Okay, i watched 90% of it and i wasted 40 minutes of my life. His message is rosy but it is a big BLA BLA BLA.

What is his vision? There is just bla bla bla in there in a sense that it only spells out the rosy parts what he thinks will happen but it doesn't connect anything together.

So lets get down to the problems:

1) His policy is to uplift the lower classes by cutting taxes basically. This is not something the EU will be against or for in a larger sense but it will be a massive problem outside of the EU. Because the EU will consider it artificial band aid to boost UKs productivity. The so called race to the bottom and hence punitive tariffs will be issued. This policy is unlikely to work outside of the EU.

2) He talks how the people told a big "Fuck you" to Westminster and the fortune 500 companies. But then he says that the whole core of Britishness, its greatness and economy is private enterprise which Corbyn is going to kill by high taxation.(The unBritishness of Corbyn) Says that "Outside of the EU, the UK will fire up all cylinders and economically will be way better". This misses that point that most private enterprises, especially the fortune 500 folk and the financial sector are in a big "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" moment about leaving the EU. So its a contradiction on what he is saying.

3) He says that both EU and UK want a deal. How it is easy to get this deal. So no way it will be a hard Brexit. But we all know he is also the one who said that UK is going to leave in October. This is a contradiction once again. How can you say the deal is easy and that you will get it but also say that we gonna leave in October one way or the other.

4) He says that No deal is the last resort of sorts and preparing for it is a way to avoid it. WUT?

5) He doesn't address problems that have been the cornerstone of the problem. Northern Ireland, Hello? What about unhappy Scotland, Hello? And many others.

6) It felt to me that the people asking the questions were cherry picked and the answers were pre-planned. The questions were cuddly soft balls. There was no real painful questions about Northern Ireland, Scotland or anything else that matters.

7) There is no clear indication of how his general policy (internal and external) is connected to leaving the EU. I understand that you want to uplift lower classes outside of London and the south East but how is it related to leaving the EU and how is that going to help you? How is leaving the EU help with immigration issues? (You have been replacing it already by non-EU migrants) How are you going to uplift Leeds and improve the infrastructure? Where are you going to get the money by lowering taxes? Where do you buy your 5g equipment/Phyberoptics?

TLDR version of the above is that Boris Johnson wants to do something that he himself clearly can't say why anymore. In a sense his own internal and external policies will be damaged and compromised by leaving the EU. A lot of the things that he said that he wants to do will be harder to implement outside of the EU. And his main argument is that "If we don't do it, the voters will snub us and will join Corbyn or other extremists".
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15011720
Whatever any of the candidates say, there will be detractors criticising them saying for saying this or that.

It doesn't matter what any of their statements say, the candidates who are 'remainers' will cost the Tories dearly at the next election, so too will BoJo or the other 'Brexit' chancers.

Whoever 'wins' the poisoned chalice, will be compelled by their circumstance to deliver Leave, because they know what the cost will be whether they do or don't.
It's equally true that it applies equally to Labour or Lib Dem MP's who are 'remainers'.

MP's at Westminster have rejected Labour's attempt at halting a 'no deal' exit from europe, that reality of the consequences of 'succeeding' from their point of view has finally registered with them.
That result is 'one-in-the-eye' for The Speaker, John BERCOW, because he has one less arrow to fire at the government when the time comes to leave.

If Labour are foolish enough to make a further attempt but 'succeed', the government would most likely as not, call a general election, based on,'who-governs' Britain' & would most likely increase it's majority due to the issue of the post referendum behaviour of Labour to renege on it's promise to deliver Leave.


Should we be out by October or December at the latest,it's not unreasonable to suppose that the new PM could call an early election by the spring of 2020, were the economy begin to recover it's optimism after the demise of project fear.

The current hiccups in the economy are due more to the uncertainty, project fear, as well as the real effects of the Tory austerity policies, however,because Leave will have been delivered, I believe that the Tories will get a hammering & Labour will win the next election on a small majority.

It will be small, because of the price of opposing Leave, for which they too will almost certainly pay a heavy price, one which, had they had a leader that enforced their manifesto promise by making their MP's support the manifesto commitments, would have greatly reduced the cost to the party & themselves.

I could be wrong of course, but I do not see how any party could possibly be optimistic on the outcome of the next election.
By snapdragon
#15011799
Yes, you're wrong. Especially this bit:

Should we be out by October or December at the latest,it's not unreasonable to suppose that the new PM could call an early election by the spring of 2020, were the economy begin to recover it's optimism after the demise of project fear

Project fear became project fact some time ago.

I would admire your optimism if it was based more on reality and less on those bloody unicorns suddenly materialising.

Not to mention on the wisdom and sensible actions of Bojo.
User avatar
By Negotiator
#15011860
LOL I have so lost any interest in Brexit I honestly have no clue whatsoever whats going on with that ! :lol: Anything actually happened recently ? :?: I really have no clue ! ;)

Listening to pro-Brexit people only gives me a headache anyway. :eh: They're all "what did the EU ever do for us". :knife: In their mind they are cowboys who need noone. :eek: Or still members of the worldwide british commonwealth. :roll: They dont understand why it makes a lot of sense for Europe to unite our forces. 8) In fact we should work on joining Russia, too, since we are still rather too few people compared to India and/or China. :O

... I seem to like smileys today ! :D
By snapdragon
#15011861
He seems to have forgotten about the money he spaffed up the wall on the water cannon fiasco, the garden bridge, the route masters....and so it goes on.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15011929
snapdragon wrote:Yes, you're wrong. Especially this bit:

Should we be out by October or December at the latest,it's not unreasonable to suppose that the new PM could call an early election by the spring of 2020, were the economy begin to recover it's optimism after the demise of project fear

Project fear became project fact some time ago.

I would admire your optimism if it was based more on reality and less on those bloody unicorns suddenly materialising.

Not to mention on the wisdom and sensible actions of Bojo.



Nonsense-

No,Sd, there are no 'unicorns', it's a plausible scenario,project 'fear' became reality before the referendum, just as it did in the Scottish independence debate, it's just that under leaving the E.U, that project' is going to go to the wire.

That 'project' is a reality, what it proclaims is just scareware, economically,the market changes in car production in this country for instance, is simply a rationalisation of the market by manufacturers, because they know that traditional vehicle internal combustion engines are not going to cut the mustard in the future where the environmental impact is a proven negative.

But that is where new opportunities present themselves & here in the U.K we can accelerate the transition to alternative transport policies besides just forging ahead in the race for EV production.

The new P.M should begin a blame campaign against the Labour Party policy for remaining in europe through it's campaign of sabotage in parliament, which, by acting against it's own manifesto, as well as against the referendum result, is actively anti-democratic & could place a huge dent in Labour's election prospects.

As for BoJo, for all of the rancour against him,within the Tory Party, the portrayal of him in the media has had absolutely no effect on his chances of securing a position as the next P.M up till now.

I personally think that Labour have shot themselves in the foot-nay-the head, politically, with their remain agenda in parliament.

It would have been more honest to have accepted the referendum,but simply promised to hold a new referendum(if elected)after the next election,if the Tories should make any deal with the E.U(can't see the E.U re-opening the agreed deal) that excluded the safeguards necessary for standards, the N.H.S etc.
By hartmut
#15012117
Nonsense wrote:Nonsense-

No,Sd, there are no 'unicorns', it's a plausible scenario,project 'fear' became reality before the referendum, just as it did in the Scottish independence debate, it's just that under leaving the E.U, that project' is going to go to the wire.

That 'project' is a reality, what it proclaims is just scareware, economically,the market changes in car production in this country for instance, is simply a rationalisation of the market by manufacturers, because they know that traditional vehicle internal combustion engines are not going to cut the mustard in the future where the environmental impact is a proven negative.

But that is where new opportunities present themselves & here in the U.K we can accelerate the transition to alternative transport policies besides just forging ahead in the race for EV production.

..


Honda decided to close Swindon, Nissan partly retreats from Sunderland, Vauxhall (now part of PSA) is literally dead, and BMW expresses concerns about future production in UK. Same does Ford.
These are big players clearly outnumbering Rover-Jaguar, meanwhile owned by TATA from India.
Indeed, the amazing recovery of British car industry was up to now, mainly driven by foreign investors, and by their inclination to get access to world biggest single market, which is at present EU.

Regarding "alternative transport policies", I can not see any advantage for UK by leaving.
Because the basic technology for that will also be driven by globalization and sizes of markets.
And because the drive of a car, whether electric or by combustion engine, loosed its leading role for added value already.
To make things short: UK is at risk to loose a important part of its industry.

The metaphor "unicorn" posted from snapdragon, could easily be the epitaph on the gravestone of a great history performed by British car makers.


If you demand links an sources for that assessment, please let me know.
By Atlantis
#15012133
hartmut wrote:UK is at risk to loose a important part of its industry.


Brexit will complete the job of de-industrializing the UK started by Thatcher.

For the car industry, Brexit arrives at the worst possible moment possible. Manufacturers need to retool their factories to manage the transition to e-mobility. With the uncertainty of Brexit, investors give the UK a wide berth, effectively dooming UK car industry for good.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15012198
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:I don't know about the others, but at least Honda and Ford have stated that the closures have nothing to do with Brexit.


Its a way for the companies to quietly leave without getting in to hot political water. They are not gonna cry "Brexit" and then be in bad standing with the politicians. That is not how you do business. But it is a bit more complicated.

Brexit is at fault both directly and indirectly. Basically to put it short it is directly involved because the company is afraid of shortages that no deal can produce, tarifs and custom checks etc. You know the project fear stuff that is more real nowadays. Now was it the main reason? Actually, no! The main problem is how the UK and Brexit are involved indirectly. UK is not fully removed from the EU institutions but UKs presence has been eroding to a great degree. In a sense, UK has no say in many things right now because they are leaving and UK agreed with this. Well Teresa May and Tory hardliners did. Little did they consider that Japanese-EU trade deal passed almost straight away after UK was excluded with UKs consent. This trade deal is good for everyone besides the UK. Since Japanese manufacturers outsource a lot of production to circumvent EU-Japanese tarifs then they do not need to do it anymore. The tarifs are disappearing as we speak and will fully disappear by 2027. So basically there is no need for those plants in the UK. They can technically be anywhere in Europe or Japan depending on market conditions. And it works both ways for EU and Japan. So basically the UK fucked itself when it agreed to lower its presence within the EU institutions.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15012199
hartmut wrote:Honda decided to close Swindon, Nissan partly retreats from Sunderland, Vauxhall (now part of PSA) is literally dead, and BMW expresses concerns about future production in UK. Same does Ford.
These are big players clearly outnumbering Rover-Jaguar, meanwhile owned by TATA from India.
Indeed, the amazing recovery of British car industry was up to now, mainly driven by foreign investors, and by their inclination to get access to world biggest single market, which is at present EU.

Regarding "alternative transport policies", I can not see any advantage for UK by leaving.
Because the basic technology for that will also be driven by globalization and sizes of markets.
And because the drive of a car, whether electric or by combustion engine, loosed its leading role for added value already.
To make things short: UK is at risk to loose a important part of its industry.

The metaphor "unicorn" posted from snapdragon, could easily be the epitaph on the gravestone of a great history performed by British car makers.


If you demand links an sources for that assessment, please let me know.



Nonsense-

None of what you say invalidates what I stated in my post.

In fact, just by retreating from the U.K, for the spurious reason of Brexit, is in no beneficial to those manufacturers quitting the U.K.

What is happening in the auto industry in this country has been a feature of that industry since the 1950's, in the main, because of poor,outdated management,lack of investment in innovation & an inability to effect global sales of British goods or services.

Foreign investors are attracted to this country by corporate tax incentives that affect the return on capital as much as by potential markets, for which British consumers really ought to be more discriminating in where their purchases are sourced from in future.

As I say, what is going on in the auto production area in this country, is & will affect many other countries too.

Those changes in demand for products that are 'greener', or friendly to the planet,is global by nature, those countries which have recently heavily invested in traditional internal combustion - engined vehicles, will lose market share, as well as profits in which to repay capital borrowings, to countries like the U.K that can counter such changes by investing in EV's, along with new battery technology.

Keeping ahead of the trend is important, as long as change is beneficial, real & qualitative.

By so doing, this country can build cars for the future,but, for which a new transport system is even more important for the future than what currently drives demand for cars.
Important changes are already taking place with electric vehicles, not just cars, but also with public transport,electronics is at the heart of those changes, but so too will materials for building lighter, more efficient & recyclable products.

Transport is economically important for any modern country, private ownership, although the preferred option, is slowly being encroached upon .

I see inter-city commuting being done on motorways that have been converted to other modes of travel, so too where those motorway exit roads will have different transport that commuters for instance, can hire to travel from those exit roads - nearby towns or villages without bearing the cost of traditional ownership of the means to travel or commute.

Our societies are always in flux, never static, sometimes change is slow, other times it's sudden & transforming.

I see no reason to fear change, I have seen, as well as have been subject to so much of it in my lifetime, that's why I see optimism in that change which Brexit begs to happen.
User avatar
By Kaiserschmarrn
#15012225
JohnRawls wrote:Its a way for the companies to quietly leave without getting in to hot political water. They are not gonna cry "Brexit" and then be in bad standing with the politicians. That is not how you do business. But it is a bit more complicated.

UK companies have frequently cried Brexit before and I wouldn't be surprised if the UK government had actually encouraged this at times in order to get its extremely unpopular deal across the line or to prevent Brexit altogether. At any rate, I'm under no illusion that we are getting a complete, honest and accurate picture, and this is of course also the case for industries on the continent that are exposed to the UK leaving the EU.

JohnRawls wrote:Brexit is at fault both directly and indirectly. Basically to put it short it is directly involved because the company is afraid of shortages that no deal can produce, tarifs and custom checks etc. You know the project fear stuff that is more real nowadays. Now was it the main reason? Actually, no! The main problem is how the UK and Brexit are involved indirectly. UK is not fully removed from the EU institutions but UKs presence has been eroding to a great degree. In a sense, UK has no say in many things right now because they are leaving and UK agreed with this. Well Teresa May and Tory hardliners did. Little did they consider that Japanese-EU trade deal passed almost straight away after UK was excluded with UKs consent. This trade deal is good for everyone besides the UK. Since Japanese manufacturers outsource a lot of production to circumvent EU-Japanese tarifs then they do not need to do it anymore. The tarifs are disappearing as we speak and will fully disappear by 2027. So basically there is no need for those plants in the UK. They can technically be anywhere in Europe or Japan depending on market conditions. And it works both ways for EU and Japan. So basically the UK fucked itself when it agreed to lower its presence within the EU institutions.

The above seems to imply that the UK had somehow blocked or delayed the trade deal between the EU and Japan before the Brexit referendum. If that's what you are trying to say, could you show me evidence for this? I think you overestimate the UK's desire to protect industries relative to much of continental Europe. The UK often doesn't even try, e.g. see the controversy about Royal Navy support vessels.

---------------------------------------

Here is another turn around by Airbus.

FDI since the referendum:

Accountancy Daily wrote:
UK inward investment double Germany and France

Despite Brexit uncertainties, the UK attracted more foreign direct investment (FDI) than Germany and France combined in 2018, United Nations data shows Foreign direct investment into the UK was worth $1.89 trillion (£1.48 trillion), more than Germany ($939bn) and France ($825bn) combined, with their total of $1.76 trillion. Between 2010 and 2018, the value of inward investment in the UK increased by 77%. The figures from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) indicated that the increase in the value of UK stock since 2010 ($822bn) was worth nearly as much as the total value of French inwards stock by the end of 2018. Over the past year the value of inward stock into the UK increased by 4.7%, compared to just 0.8% in France and a 1.9% fall in Germany.

Other indications that overseas confidence in the British economy remains strong include a 20% increase after the 2016 referendum in the number of announced cross-border greenfield (new investment) projects into the UK. On average there were 1,192 announced projects per year over the period 2012-2016, compared to 1,428 projects over 2017-2018. Overall between 2014 and 2018 there were 6,714 greenfield projects into the UK, more than anywhere else in Europe, and more than France (3,283) and Spain (2,765) combined.

Dr Liam Fox, international trade secretary, said: ‘The figures prove the British economy is by far the most attractive place in Europe for foreign direct investment, securing more than the impressive economies of Germany and France combined. ‘The UK’s pro-business environment is what makes it one of the most prosperous countries in the world to invest in. From our booming tech industry to our world-leading financial services sector, investors from all over the world see Britain as their destination of choice for relocation.’

By Atlantis
#15012287
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:UK companies have frequently cried Brexit before ...


John is right, companies have deliberately kept a low profile in the Brexit campaign so as not to provoke a knee-jerk reaction against the "big bad capitalists". Some are even now being accused of not having given sufficient warning before the vote about the damage Brexit would cause. As to the reasons given for the closures, most CEOs who want to continue doing business in the UK know better than to get on the wrong side of the government. Whatever other reasons there may be, Brexit quite clearly is a principle reason for the drastic reduction in car manufacturing.

FDI since the referendum:


The UK needs to attract the inflow of capital to offset the double deficit (budget and trade). As the BoE chairman said "the UK lives by the kindness of strangers." In other words, the government is forced to continue deregulating until it has sold the last of its table silver so as to keep the house of cards from collapsing. Moreover, much of that money is probably linked to the empire of British tax havens that is managed by the City of London. That money channeled via the tax havens is probably several times the size of the real UK economy.

Following Brexit, that flow has been reduced and more money goes to the continent. But I understand why the Brexitters you cite need to give it a different spin.
  • 1
  • 196
  • 197
  • 198
  • 199
  • 200
  • 279

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/xnX[…]

They have every right to protest. I’ll be protest[…]

Syrian war thread

Turkish military operation in Northeastern Syria c[…]

The return of the Kuril Islands has become the Jap[…]