British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Take it Outside! (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/)
-   -   Post EU Referendum (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/post-eu-referendum-879308/)

Red Eric Apr 1st 2018 8:23 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 
Seems like a totally uncontrolled petition if anybody in the entire world can sign it.

Is there one for the GKN takeover?

morpeth Apr 1st 2018 9:13 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Cape Blue (Post 12473691)
No it's "realistic and refrained from overt political bias" because it appeals to you in your bubble with your bias.

The very tittle is:
Hardly starts off in an objective way.

Whether one is for or against Brexit, it seems quite objective to note the vast amount of variables that can effect the final outcome. Actually I think you can take the phrase in the opposite way- that there is a possibility it could "go right".

The article simply points out the difficulties, in particular re-negotiating 600 treaties in a short time frame. Let alone the NI and Gibraltar border issues.

It is challenging to imagine how reducing to whatever degree access to the EU market is a benefit to the UK. The only potential concrete benefit I can see is that reducing the influx of lower skilled workers should have some tendency of increasing wages for the lower-skilled, yet will tat outweigh the disadvatanges of Brexit ?

Britain has a major economy, is a significant exporter, and center for financial services, yet like many advanced economies has some rather persistent economic problems especially for the poor, working poor and those without the skills for a modern economy.Reducing access to the European market, reducing opportunities for the young to live,work and study in the EU- I admit while emotionally I could support Brexit, but as a practical matter I remain unconvinced it will be an economic benefit. It won't reduce overall immigration, it won't result in funds for the NHS, and to add insult to injury, Britain will have to pay the EU to leave.

I think I can be reasonable objective, is there any objective study that shows Brexit will result in an improvement in the British economy ? Or that the young will benefit from reduced access to living,working and studying in the EU ?

morpeth Apr 1st 2018 9:19 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by la mancha (Post 12473702)
Since you people still want to drag this out I will reply. The petition is not about political loyalties or Brexit or the EU but making a point, and that point is telling the government what you think, you want to safeguard British jobs, as per the Unite website.

All I did was post ‘I have just signed the Daily Mail petition to get the new British passport printed in Britain. If you want to support British jobs here is the link.’ No insults, no telling people what to do, just a plain old link to a petition, and you all jumped on me. I don’t care if you do not want to join Unite and send a message to the government in support of British jobs. You can live with your consciences, if you have any, I really don’t care about any of you, but after the barrage of drivel I received, I asked why not just put a simple click on a petition. And this is what I got back, every quote from a Remainer.

‘Why havent you emailed Dr la Rue asking them why they are ripping off the British passport holders ?’

‘You are such a drama queen.’

‘Is there a Daily Mail petition requesting that it doesn't print misleading headline…?’ A nice one, Red, pitiful, coming from you, but nice, all the same.

‘Look what Bipat and Cape Blue said.’ Even better, Red. Who would have thought you, of all posters, would use Bipat and Cape Blue as an excuse for anything, but any port in a storm, eh, Red?

‘Market forces, innit!’

‘I'm not UK resident.’ Your excuses get even better, Red. Just look up the Unite/Mirror petition and you will see it has a pop-down tab that lists every country in the world where a British citizen can sign from. All you need is a post code. Go on; now tell me you haven’t got one of those.

‘It's disgusting to read how you are trying to use British workers for your own gratification.’ How so, when I am following Unite and signing a petition which you Remainers will not?

‘How many other companies have had massive job cuts yet no Daily Mail petition?’ A lovely bit of whataboutism. Well now is your time to speak out and do something tangible.

‘But there'll be crop picking jobs available because EU migrants are going elsewhere due to Brexit uncertainty.’

‘I want nothing to do with bigoted idiots who challenge the patriotism of anyone who does not agree with them.’ This, laughably, from EMR, calling others bigoted idiots, one who uses insults for everyone who disagrees with him.

And last, but not least…

‘I've never done so before - why should I this time?’

Well, this is the first petition I have signed and I did it because I read what Len McCluskey and Louisa Bull had to say and I strongly think I should do something, no matter how small.

Sign the (Mirror) petition against this betrayal of British workers, says Unite. How about it, Red, feel like supporting Unite and British workers and signing?

I now expect the usual crowd to come back to me with their sneering digs and insults, safe in their comfort zone of the sneering mob. Funny how these Remainers are always looking down on others and talking down Britain (and if not please show me a post where you talked up Britain – anyone?), yet when they have a chance to put their money where their mouths are and do something positive they decline with amazingly pathetic excuses. Really, some of the excuses you give for not signing a child would be embarrassed to use (and I don’t care if you do or do not sign – I posted the link to call you out and I was right in my assumption of you Remainers; a bunch of mocking, infantile, condescending, gutless quitters who run at the first chance to do something tangible in support of Unite and British workers).

I guess I am confused reading all this. Hardly is De La Rue ripping off British taxpayers, most likely simply they are less efficient than their EU competitor.

How is printing the passports for one hundred million more pounds or whatever better than paying less- the hundred million pound savings could go to the NHS, investment in higher growth higher productive industries, more training to get NHS staff ?

Cape Blue Apr 1st 2018 9:48 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Expatrick (Post 12473695)
Schizophrenia - a long-term mental disorder of a type involving a breakdown in the relation between thought, emotion, and behaviour, leading to faulty perception, inappropriate actions and feelings, withdrawal from reality and personal relationships into fantasy and delusion, and a sense of mental fragmentation.
(in general use) a mentality or approach characterized by inconsistent or contradictory elements.

Well at least you feel you can discuss it here - that must be a boon for you. Very brave of you to bring it out into the open, I'll take note when reading your posts in future.

Cape Blue Apr 1st 2018 9:49 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 12473693)
Oh, should it be "here's how England will again rule the world"? Well, that would be a uniquely English viewpoint as compared to the insignificant "rest of the world"..

Get real.

No, that would be just as biased the other way, how about a balanced view?

DaveLovesDee Apr 1st 2018 9:54 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12473850)
How is printing the passports for one hundred million more pounds or whatever better than paying less- the hundred million pound savings could go to the NHS, investment in higher growth higher productive industries, more training to get NHS staff ?

It could, but it wouldn't, would it?

There'd probably be yet another tax cut for the rich instead.....

DaveLovesDee Apr 1st 2018 9:55 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Cape Blue (Post 12473863)
No, that would be just as biased the other way, how about a balanced view?

Ok. How about one?

Watchpost Apr 1st 2018 10:02 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by la mancha (Post 12473260)
So to those who have not signed, and there are a few who have said they have not, I ask why not? I am only curious.

OK, if you're genuinely curious:

One: According to the Daily Mail, last year de la Rue manufactured passports for 40 countries around the world. I understand it also supplies banknotes to over 140 different countries.

If it's a given that the job of making British passports should go to British workers, shouldn't the job of printing other countries' passports, and currency, go to companies and workers in the countries concerned? Isn't it hypocritical for the Daily Mail to talk about protecting "British jobs for British workers" when a lot of the work being done by the company concerned is of exactly the same kind but for other countries, whose workers would doubtless be glad of the work if they could get it?

Two: It isn't within the UK government's power to award the contract to de la Rue: it was subject to public procurement rules, not only the EU's, but also the WTO's. The notion that the government can simply disregard those rules from one day to the next is naive in the extreme. The Daily Mail could just as least have a petition asking the government to promise good weather over the Easter weekend.

Three: The UK could no doubt withdraw from those agreements, but then the Daily Mail should be honest and have a petition calling for it to do that, and should explain the consequences. Or perhaps the procurement process wasn't conducted fairly, but again, that should then be the focus of the Daily Mail's efforts, not British passports made in Britain because British innit.

Four: Whilst I have sympathy for people who wish to show loyalty to their own community, the modern world is complex and it isn't necessarily clear what their own "community" is. This is an expats' forum. Is it wrong to identify as a European? Should expats be expected effectively to support a boycott of companies in their host countries? And how many people signing that petition are wearing clothes made in China, driving cars made in Germany, and ordering anything and everything from Amazon whilst their local high streets slowly die out?

Martin Sutherland, the chief executive of de la Rue, apparently said this on BBC radio: "I’m going to have to face those workers, look at the whites of their eyes and try to explain to them why the government thinks it’s a sensible decision to buy French passports and not British passports."

Whites of their eyes? What is this, Rourke's Drift?

The Empire isn't what it used to be. Ian Paisley knew the symbolic value of official documents: in 1981, drilling his militia in the Antrim hills, he had them present their firearms certificates. His son, Ian Paisley junior, could have followed in his father's footsteps and had the Paisley militia present iconic blue British passports. Instead, immediately following the referendum, he advised his constituents to secure their EU citizenship rights by applying for, wait for it, Irish passports. But one can't help but wonder whether the whole episode isn't one big comedy of errors caused by a Grauniad typo of "iconic" instead of "ironic". Because since 2006, Irish passports have been made by: de la Rue...

Cape Blue Apr 1st 2018 10:05 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12473847)
Whether one is for or against Brexit, it seems quite objective to note the vast amount of variables that can effect the final outcome. Actually I think you can take the phrase in the opposite way- that there is a possibility it could "go right".

The article simply points out the difficulties, in particular re-negotiating 600 treaties in a short time frame. Let alone the NI and Gibraltar border issues.

It is challenging to imagine how reducing to whatever degree access to the EU market is a benefit to the UK. The only potential concrete benefit I can see is that reducing the influx of lower skilled workers should have some tendency of increasing wages for the lower-skilled, yet will tat outweigh the disadvatanges of Brexit ?

Britain has a major economy, is a significant exporter, and center for financial services, yet like many advanced economies has some rather persistent economic problems especially for the poor, working poor and those without the skills for a modern economy.Reducing access to the European market, reducing opportunities for the young to live,work and study in the EU- I admit while emotionally I could support Brexit, but as a practical matter I remain unconvinced it will be an economic benefit. It won't reduce overall immigration, it won't result in funds for the NHS, and to add insult to injury, Britain will have to pay the EU to leave.

I think I can be reasonable objective, is there any objective study that shows Brexit will result in an improvement in the British economy ? Or that the young will benefit from reduced access to living,working and studying in the EU ?

Yes - the article is focused on the negatives, not the positives - that's why it is the usual remainer bubble.

As I have frequently said, I was a remain voter and would likely do so again, but that isn't going to happen and nor should it. We are leaving and endlessly moaning and whining about it does nothing for us going forwards and seems a mental health risk for some of the extreme remainiacs.

Gib and NI are problems, but relatively small ones - there are 65,000,000 people in the UK, these in reality impact a few hundred thousand at most.

Many of your points are just reiterating the referendum arguments - I see many remainers can't stop this, like some sort of groundhog day cycling through the reasons why we shouldn't leave - we ARE leaving, start preparing for it.

The idea that UK youth live and work in the EU in any significant numbers is far from reality - the majority of Brits living in the EU are retirees taking their capital and pensions to the EU.

I suspect the short-term uncertainty and risk will be a negative impact for the economy for the next few years and any benefits from freer trade will be some years down the road. A sensible FTA with the EU will be important, but if we end up on WTO it will not be the end of the world.

Re immigration - it will be interesting to see if government does fold to the elites and continues to permit mass migration, both from the EU and non-EU. if they do then any benefits for the lower orders via wage inflation and stabilised accommodation costs will be lost.

Cape Blue Apr 1st 2018 10:07 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by DaveLovesDee (Post 12473865)
Ok. How about one?

Just look back at my posts ;)

jimenato Apr 1st 2018 10:22 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Cape Blue (Post 12473870)

...
Re immigration - it will be interesting to see if government does fold to the elites and continues to permit mass migration, both from the EU and non-EU. if they do then any benefits for the lower orders via wage inflation and stabilised accommodation costs will be lost.

And if that does happen it will have been what leavers voted for.

Unless, of course, they didn't know what they were voting for.

jimenato Apr 1st 2018 10:22 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Cape Blue (Post 12473872)
Just look back at my posts ;)

At least you have a sense of humour.:)

Red Eric Apr 1st 2018 11:24 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 
Seems like the elites are getting their wants pushed alright :

Concerns that the Legatum Institute, the libertarian thinktank that advocates a hard Brexit, is playing a behind-the-scenes role in shaping Britain’s future trade policy have been heightened after claims that it has enjoyed greater private access to trade ministers and civil servants than any other body....

...Nick Dearden, director of Global Justice Now, said its attempts under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain even rudimentary information about the 14 working groups set up by Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, to plan for the future trade policy had been rejected.

He accused the trade department of refusing to answer when the groups, which focus on geographical areas such as the Gulf or the Andes and specific countries, such as the US, had met and what they had discussed.

“It’s incredible that while MPs and representative groups have no right to know what’s going on in trade discussions our government is having with Trump’s administration, an extreme free trade, hard Brexit thinktank has such privileged access to government ministers,” Dearden said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ward-whitehall

So, if the future immigration policy fails to deliver what you want, Bluey, you'll know exactly who to blame.

morpeth Apr 1st 2018 11:24 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Cape Blue (Post 12473870)
Yes - the article is focused on the negatives, not the positives - that's why it is the usual remainer bubble.

As I have frequently said, I was a remain voter and would likely do so again, but that isn't going to happen and nor should it. We are leaving and endlessly moaning and whining about it does nothing for us going forwards and seems a mental health risk for some of the extreme remainiacs.

Gib and NI are problems, but relatively small ones - there are 65,000,000 people in the UK, these in reality impact a few hundred thousand at most.

Many of your points are just reiterating the referendum arguments - I see many remainers can't stop this, like some sort of groundhog day cycling through the reasons why we shouldn't leave - we ARE leaving, start preparing for it.

The idea that UK youth live and work in the EU in any significant numbers is far from reality - the majority of Brits living in the EU are retirees taking their capital and pensions to the EU.

I suspect the short-term uncertainty and risk will be a negative impact for the economy for the next few years and any benefits from freer trade will be some years down the road. A sensible FTA with the EU will be important, but if we end up on WTO it will not be the end of the world.

Re immigration - it will be interesting to see if government does fold to the elites and continues to permit mass migration, both from the EU and non-EU. if they do then any benefits for the lower orders via wage inflation and stabilised accommodation costs will be lost.

The article focuses on the negatives because it is hard even for those who voted for Brexit to point out the positives, except try to downplay the negatives as your post does.

Reducing options for the young isnt a positive, and I would guess the retirees may encounter some negatives as well.

The GIB and NI border issues may affect not that many, but could ave a negative effect.

Renegotiating 600 agreements, losing some access to trade with the EU, against what benefit ? Putting a nations economic future on a path "well maybe it will be beneficial" seems an irresponsible way to run a country.

I guess I am repeating the same questions all have because those in favor of Brexit, or following through with it, don't seem to have any solid arguments as to why Britain shouldn't have another referendum and put an end to the whole mater.

As far as I can tell government seems unable/unwilling to reduce overall immigration.

So what is the beneficial point about Brexit ?

The moaning is I think an expression of trying to understand what logic supports Brexit under the current circumstances.

la mancha Apr 1st 2018 11:58 am

Re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12473850)
I guess I am confused reading all this. Hardly is De La Rue ripping off British taxpayers, most likely simply they are less efficient than their EU competitor.

How is printing the passports for one hundred million more pounds or whatever better than paying less- the hundred million pound savings could go to the NHS, investment in higher growth higher productive industries, more training to get NHS staff ?


I will answer your post for everyone because I haven’t the time to do so individually.

Morpeth. You could use your argument against all government spending, i.e. the foreign aid budget. You see, you also miss the point. The petition was a call to safeguard British jobs that could be lost due to the loss of the passport contract. Is Unite wrong to call a petition on this?

LIW. You Remainers are well known for piss-taking and I do not complain about it. I find it amusing coming from you. Piss-taking is all you Remainers have left in your armoury. Ah, a bully now, am I? Never mind, snowflake, find a safe space and you won’t have to read my posts.

Red. Whataboutism again? If you read my post correctly, which I think you did but just have the need to be contradictory and very unfunny, I said the Unite petition is open to any British citizen in the world.

Watchpost. Maybe other nations do not have the secure and technically advanced facilities as we in the UK have to print their own.

And you again drive off on a tangent talking about boycotts, something not connected to what Unite is saying.

You use the phrase ‘whites of their eyes’ to go back to the Empire again, a much travelled term with you Remainers. Why? I have never used it.

You say it isn't within the UK government's power to award the contract to de la Rue: it was subject to public procurement rules, not only the EU's, but also the WTO's.

I thought security issue procurement could be exempt from EU procurement rules. Is it true French passports are printed by Imprimerie Nationale, the state-run French printing organisation, with the French government having made the decision not to put the job out to tender?

This is all I am saying on this subject.


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:52 pm.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.