.
I think you mean EU mainland Edukator
The banks will all have to relocate to frankfurt or brussels if they want to continue to work in the EU - there is a big loss. Nissan will leave once they realise May cannot keep her promises or they have have to be bunged a fortune to staqy. No more inward investment from multinationals who used to come to the UK because of our poor workers protection but eu access. NO incentive for them to come here any more
I do, TJ, Thanks.
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/04/boris-johnson-ends-sky-news-interview-over-world-leaders-pub-quiz ]people always ask me the same question, they say, 'Is Boris a very very clever man pretending to be an idiot?' And I always say, 'No.' [/url]
The banks will all have to relocate to frankfurt or brussels if they want to continue to work in the EU - there is a big loss. Nissan will leave once they realise May cannot keep her promises or they have have to be bunged a fortune to staqy. No more inward investment from multinationals who used to come to the UK because of our poor workers protection but eu access. NO incentive for them to come here any more
Bearing in mind that Nissan only came to the UK to get around EU trade tariffs and quotas, I'm prepared to take a guess on where their allegiances lie.
thanks Jambalaya I always try to do my best when writing on here .
A bit of a surprise re the Austrian election . a much larger gap than previously .
The No was a clear leader in Italy but polls have been banned since mid November .
The turnout is high , which could favor the SI .
Renault is partly owned by the French government and Renault bought Nissan. The only reason Renault manufactures in the UK is because the COGs (cost of goods sold) are lower than in its other plants that have surplus capacity.
It's a very odd mentality that is based on making important partners worse off???
The EU sees the importance of not being a collection of economic minnows in response to the growing economic might of China*. It'll look after itself first. If we're not on board, it's our problem. I think we should be on board but others disagreed.
* I would have said China and the US, but the latter seems to be busy shooting itself in the foot.
yeshow on earth can you really think the EU has more to lose over a hard leave than we have?
Only a complete lack of grasp of the subject can make one think that in a risk of 45% of trade v 4% of course the 4% will be worse off.
looks like it is a no in Italy .
It will be the first poll in 5 to have been right if it is mind 🙂
Indeed Welsh, it's like Junky (or TJ) and I agreeing, eventually it has to happen 🙂
We don't want to make the EU worse off, however they had created an artificial link between THE single market and freedom of movement. Plus a trade free zone does not need a humungous budget nor an expensive faux parliament. As such a hard exit is in my view the best way to achieve what we want in terms of global trade. If for the preservation of their oh so precious political project they want to inflict self harm by refusing to agree a commerically sensible deal then so be it.
The Italian PM did prove me wrong as he has actually confirmed he will resign assuming no funny games where the President refuses to accept his resignation.
Austria. Ineresting that the establishment candidate is from the Greens 😉 Seems the result went from 50.1/49.9 to 52/48 a swing of about 300,000 voters I believe.Still highly polarised and the Government and EU can't ignore the vote.
Austria. Ineresting that the establishment candidate is from the Greens Seems the result went from 50.1/49.9 to 52/48 a swing of about 300,000 voters I believe.Still highly polarised and the Government and EU can't ignore the vote.
I thought the rules for 52/48 was completely ignore the losing side 😉
Chapeau Jambas that is some great work 😆
Cameron resigned following the referendum result and was replaced by May (no significant change). The Italian ruling party can do the same.
The rise of the Greens and far right in Austria shows that minority parties can thrive when the traditional parties no longer inspire or annoy large numbers of people.
I'm not sure the Labour party in the UK or the PS in France will ever be the force they were in the past. The Richmond result may be a blip or a sign that the Brexit "debate" is turning people away from the Tory party. The far right has had a good run but populations are seeing the damage they can do with Brexit as the best example. Time for some new centre right and Green parties. I'll vote for them if they come up with manifesto I agree with.
ok what single [ or free]market has a restriction on labour?they had created an artificial link between THE single market and freedom of movement.
Supply of labour is clearly an intrinsic part of any free market as without it its clearly a "bureaucratic hindrance".
You really must be trolling
DO you not remember Boris getting an offer of a copy of the treaty of rome?
Perhaps THM can give you Economics 101
I dont know how simplistic he can make it but fingers crossed patronisation is a superb pedagogical approach for those who dwell under bridges
I thought the rules for 52/48 was completely ignore the losing side
Excellent 🙂
So Austrian or Italian result more interesting?
I can't help having a "flaky Italian politics still flaky shocker" feeling about last night.
Particularly when the electorate are meant to be signaling a desire for change by voting against reform - an oversimplification I know, but still...
Italian politics have only been stable under Mussolini and that didn't end well.
Be fair. They did a decent job of European integration for a which under the Roman administration.
Jambas, mon amis, avez-vous remarqué l'efficacité du logiciel de blocage* allégué par le petit homme qui vit sous le pont? 😉
(could be a bit of franglais there?)
The world gets messier by the day.....
"They did a decent job of European integration for a which under the Roman administration."
...and the Nazis.
ok what single [ or free]market has a restriction on labour?
Supply of labour is clearly an intrinsic part of any free market as without it its clearly a "bureaucratic hindrance".
A single market requires free movement of labour. The earlier common market (as the term is generally used) does not and more resembles a customs union.
But why does either require free movement of all citizens (not just workers) and equal treatment for benefits, healthcare and education?
While plenty of brexiters do take the "they steal our jobs" line (be it true or not) the more general objection I find is to the free movement of non-workers (be it a real problem or not).
While plenty of brexiters do take the "they steal our jobs" line (be it true or not) the more general objection I find is to the free movement of non-workers (be it a real problem or not).
Surely we don't want all those orange pensioners back from the Costa del Wrinkly, do we?
Surely we don't want all those orange pensioners back from the Costa del Wrinkly, do we?
Indeed. I don't know the figures, but if we're talking non-workers, then I'd suspect that far more UK non-workers have settled in the EU than vice-versa.
I guess we can also look forward to the return of the leading lights of the British underworld. The UK organised crime industry needs it's brightest and best if it's going to compete globally with it's US, Chinese and Japanese counterparts.
Surely we don't want all those orange pensioners back from the Costa del Wrinkly, do we?
The Spanish don't want them to go either, they sustain the economy down in the south (along with the Scandi's and Germans).
We don't want to make the EU worse off, however they had created an artificial link between THE single market and freedom of movement.
What's artificial about this - the idea is to have one market in which capital, goods and services and people are free to move. Makes far more sense that anything else that is being proposed.
What is artificial is to make likes between eg,
1. Cost of membership/membership itself and UK trade deficit
2. Immigration and wages, employment, public services
3. Membership "costs" - real or otherwise - and the NHS
4. etc....
Plus a trade free zone does not need a humungous budget nor an expensive faux parliament.
which is a good job that we have neither.
36,000 employed in Derbyshire CC v 33,000 in EU Commission - which is the more bloated? (ok, mixing cooking apples with eaters there admittedly!)
But why does either require free movement of all citizens (not just workers) and equal treatment for benefits, healthcare and education?
There is no freedom of movement, there is freedom to work and to expect equal treatment, but you are not free to relocate and expect a different state to support you if you have no hope of finding employment.
The Spanish don't want them to go either, they sustain the economy down in the south (along with the Scandi's and Germans).
Who is paying their healthcare post Brexit?
There is no freedom of movement, there is freedom to work and to expect equal treatment, but you are not free to relocate and expect a different state to support you if you have no hope of finding employment.
Actually there pretty much is. In France and soon to be Germany you get less money than someone who has paid into their system for a number of years but you still get a certain amount. France the min benefit is €500 a month plus housing entitlement plus health care. The Germans spend €800m pa on unemployment benefits for EU citizens. The Uk has introduced variois laws to attempt to reduce what's paid, create a period before which you can claim anything but it's like sticking your finger in the dyke to stop a flood. See that (Channel4 ?) piece on housing ninfan posted before
TeamH there is no other free trade block with freedom of movement of labour ? The closest I can think of is the respective recipricol rights that exist between Australia and NZ. Two culturally similar and pretty much equally wealthy countries. You can understand freedom of movement between France/Lux/Belgium/Germany the original 9. The extensionnof rights in Masstricht and Lisbon and the rapid and huge expansion the EU has exposed the weakness of that "principal". We voted NO to it as did the Swiss. I am sure many other countries would given the choice.
TeamH there is no other free trade block with freedom of movement of labour ?
So what? The EU is not a free trade block. Its a single market. Different things. All the better for it.
Indeed. I don't know the figures, but if we're talking non-workers, then I'd suspect that far more UK non-workers have settled in the EU than vice-versa.
Sssh. Then the daily mail might have to stop its headlines about the tiny number of immigrants that arrive and collect a nice chunk of benefits.
There is no freedom of movement, there is freedom to work and to expect equal treatment, but you are not free to relocate and expect a different state to support you if you have no hope of finding employment.
It is illegal to use nationality as a basis for discrimination in benefits. If a benefit is given to UK nationals in a given circumstance, it must also be given to EU migrants in the same circumstance. I quoted the relevant article earlier. Some countries work around this by also limiting benefits to their own citizens. We don't so much.
Anyone at Derbyshire CC make €500k pa with a 1.9% accrual per anum final salary style pension (so 5 years in that job is a €50k pa pension, 10 years is €100k) , oh and pay 10% tax on that plus a parachute payment of €500k over 2 years when they step down. Also does Derbyshire CC move lock stock and barrel to its second building in Newcastle every month to actually vote on anything ? The EU needs a small dedicated civil service to manage day to day business paid for on a per capita basis by member states. Other programmes like research funding should be reviewed on a programme by programme basis. The EU needs no flag and certainly no army.
Jeez all this about the the cost of a few EU migrant worker who are between jobs. The cost is derisory compared with the wealth generated by the hundreds of thousands of active EU migrants and the NI contributions they make.
If things go on as they are they'll feel so uncomfortable they'll leave of their own accord taking their skills and the wealth they've generated with them. Look at the migrant workers on this thread, they're skilled, well educated, intelligent, enterprising... .
It does have a small dedicated "civil service" - that was my point.
So what? The EU is not a free trade block. Its a single market. Different things. All the better for it.
Everyone else has either looked at that model and rejected it or just rejected it without even considering it for more than 2 minutes
It's not we voted for in 1975, we where never asked again until 2016
It's not a market, it's now a political construct. A market doesn't have a parliament, a flag or citizens.
European Union, absolutely no interest whatsoever. A European Free Trade Area, yup.
Edukator the various member countries have had their chance to make that argument to their populations and failed. The UK government had that chance by publishing fully the data from immigrants banded by salary and fully costed showing the imapct on services including health and schooling, the impact on housing. They have done none of that. In my view that's because the detailed data doesn't back up their high level broadbrush arguments.
The Germans feel the same way hence a 5 year block on claiming unemployment
Grumpy, you are right we could change our whole welfare system to be contributory to address that problem but it's not feasible.
So Jamba - are you stuill claiming a Soft leave is possible and a hard leave would hurt the EU more than the UK?
"Britain must understand that there is no “silver bullet” over Brexit that would permit single market access without paying into the EU and being bound by some of its rules, Norway’s foreign minister has warned ahead of a meeting in London."
"“We were very clear that there is no silver bullet in this context,” he said. “Being a part of the single market, as we are, also means to implement all directives, and we are not in the room when these directives are decided on."
"“If Britain chose to go through an EAA agreement, being a full member of the single market, taking all the directives, contributing to the EU, we have to assess such an interest, he said. ”But so far, I think, your prime minister, Theresa May, has said you’re working along different lines.”
And this is the best we can possibly get and still includes free movement of people.
Everyone else has either looked at that model and rejected it or just rejected it without even considering it for more than 2 minutes
The stupidity of everyone else/the (slight) majority is what got us into the mess in the first place. We are now going to replace a well-designed package with an inferior one. That takes stupidity to a different level altogether.
A quote from a member of the [b]pro EU[/b] Italian Government and the anti-EU 5-star
“I think that the beginning of European disintegration has started with Brexit,” Mr Gozi told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.“It is up to the other 27 governments to re-launch Europe. That was our policy, that was our goal as the Renzi government. It is clear that now Europe loses a major political actor to its relaunch.”
Speaking on the same programme, a spokesperson for Italy’s anti-politics Five Star Movement took aim at the European single currency.
“The Euro is a problem for Italy right now and we would like to get people’s voices on that because we never did,” Daniele Caprera said.
“There were so many promises made by the old politics which people believed. I think the Euro is damaging the Italian economy.”
Will catch up on the R4 interview later
Well one thing is correct there - the fault lies in the Euro. On that we can agree.
Farage's grand march has turned up at court
[img] 
[/img]
The Italians blame the Euro and yet were incapable of managing the Lire when they had their own currency. Years of inflation, stagflation, competitive devaluations. Remember how many zeros there used to be on their banknotes? The Euro hasn't made their industry uncompetetive, you can blame local "taxes" and taxes for that. In France it's the tax on work that the problem not the Euro. A country with a social security system funded by taxing work is never going to compete with a country that taxes profits and incomes.
"Edukator the various member countries have had their chance to make that argument to their populations and failed. The UK government had that chance by publishing fully the data from immigrants banded by salary and fully costed showing the imapct on services including health and schooling, the impact on housing. They have done none of that. In my view that's because the detailed data doesn't back up their high level broadbrush arguments"
Broadly speaking it must be true. Doubling your population by definition must, on average double your GDP give or take.
But economic considerations aren't some kind of joker that trump all other factors. A village near me has gone from 200 houses to 5000 houses in a year. That area is richer - houses are more valuable than fields. But those 200 original residents are unhappy and telling them their village is 25 times wealthier is zero consolation.
I think the other 99,999.00 people expected are all behind that police van.
Now, I'm no fan of Nigel but I think the sign is a little harsh - how many months since June:
And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads. And the beast that I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear's, and its mouth was like a lion's mouth. And to it the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority. One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed, and the whole earth marveled as they followed the beast. And they worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?” And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. ...
Something needs to be done about The Daily Mail.
The links are banned on here but I think it's important to read their hate filled dirge. Know your enemy and all that.
They've got a big article today about the Supreme Court case
This section is particularly horrific
The judges and the people: Next week, 11 unaccountable individuals will consider a case that could thwart the will of the majority on Brexit. The Mail makes no apology for revealing their views - and many have links to Europe
The bile they then spout is blatant hate speak, racism, misogyny, attacking family members etc
Examples
Subtle anti-semitism
Of course, one expects Lord Neuberger to ignore such views when sitting as Supreme Court president. Another person close to him with strong anti-Brexit views is his sister-in-law Julia, a Leftish peer who used to take the Lib Dem whip (but became a crossbencher in 2011 when [b]she took a job as a full-time rabbi)[/b]
Misogyny
In another typical article, she asked: 'Do we still think it necessary, desirable or even practicable to grant marriage licences to enter into relationships?' Her own marital history seemed to dovetail with this theme. In 1984, shortly after being appointed to the Commission, [b]she left first husband[/b] John Hogget for a fellow commissioner, Julian Farrand.
Hatred for anything foreign
Began his career at a Hamburg law firm in the early Sixties, and has retained intimate links with the European legal establishment ever since.
How dare us Scot's have a say
[b]One of the court's two Scots[/b], he's spent a big portion of his adult life working for European institutions.
