'We can no longer blame Brussels. This is perhaps the most important point of all. If we left the EU, we would end this sterile debate, and we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by “Bwussels”, but by chronic British short-termism, inadequate management, sloth, low skills, a culture of easy gratification and under-investment in both human and physical capital and infrastructure.'
That would be one advantage of leaving I guess.
It is one of a number of excellent reasons to leave. On this very subject, I quote the usually excellent economist Melissa Kidd of Redburn:
"The UK's current account deficit remains close to record highs. It is the second largest in the world after the US deficit. Its counterparts are a government deficit and a household deficit which are both wider than in 2007. The government deficit is entirely structural since the output gap has already closed. A substantial fiscal effort lies ahead of the Chancellor. Households are borrowing more now than in 2007 and the savings rate is at fifty year lows. The Bank of England missed the opportunity to raise rates from mid-2014 to mid-2015 and will have to make up for this by tightening macroprudential measures.
As a result of this structural profile, Brexit fears are pushing on an open door when it comes to sterling. The path ahead for the UK economy lies with a much cheaper exchange rate and weaker domestic demand growth as imported inflation rises and fiscal policy tightens. It is difficult to avoid this outcome, in or out of the EU. The good news is that the weaker sterling becomes, the easier the adjustment is."
Hollande threatening 'consequences' for the UK if it leaves EU will I think have the opposite effect on UK voters - it will make them more determined to vote leave. we don't take kindly to threats from our old arch enemy
I am not sure about that - there is a logic to the idea that if we leave why should France, or anyone else in the EU, not play hard ball. The amount of coverage on the broadcast media today will have cut through to some no matter that leave dismiss it as nonsense
Of course they can play hard ball.
But it also risks giving two impressions:
(1) that threats are being used to persuade us to remain rather than anything more positive. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Remain might wish to remember that.
(2) it raises - in my mind - a real question about the good faith of one of the key countries within the EU. Given that so much of its structure and political outlook is based on the French model and give the promises which have been made, I am being asked to trust in the good faith of the French and others. This sort of comment does not incline me to place much reliance in their good faith, to be frank.
I just think the French would be more bloody minded then most
The French will always be bloody minded right up until the Germans bitch slap them into doing what they're told.
'We can no longer blame Brussels. This is perhaps the most important point of all. If we left the EU, we would end this sterile debate, and we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by “Bwussels”, but by chronic British short-termism, inadequate management, sloth, low skills, a culture of easy gratification and under-investment in both human and physical capital and infrastructure.'
That would be one advantage of leaving I guess.
I don't think that many British people, even those voting Leave, think that our economic and societal problems are primarily caused by the EU.
The EU is a symptom, not a cause. A truly healthy, awake, democratic society wants nothing to do with the EU, even if bordered by it on every side, as Switzerland shows us.
Hollande threatening 'consequences' for the UK if it leaves EU will I think have the opposite effect on UK voters - it will make them more determined to vote leave. we don't take kindly to threats from our old arch enemy
I am not sure about that - there is a logic to the idea that if we leave why should France, or anyone else in the EU, not play hard ball. The amount of coverage on the broadcast media today will have cut through to some no matter that leave dismiss it as nonsense
Of course they can play hard ball.
But it also risks giving two impressions:
(1) that threats are being used to persuade us to remain rather than anything more positive. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Remain might wish to remember that.
(2) it raises - in my mind - a real question about the good faith of one of the key countries within the EU. Given that so much of its structure and political outlook is based on the French model and give the promises which have been made, I am being asked to trust in the good faith of the French and others. This sort of comment does not incline me to place much reliance in their good faith, to be frank.
I just think the French would be more bloody minded then most
The French will always be bloody minded right up until the Germans bitch slap them into doing what they're told.
And the reason for staying in an organisation run like this is.....?
Started tightening last night and now all the way in to 1.34.
That's a big move.
Any explanation? I can't see any comment on here.
My plan is not working. I have 3 figures invested at about 4 on Betfair for Leave. The plan was to go all green as the polls tightened.
Surely some PB Leavers want to pick up some easy money by betting on these odds? After all Remain is doomed, or so we hear monotonously...
I've not heard this monotonously here. I've heard Leave is doomed repeatedly on articles here (especially from Meeks) and repeatedly that the country should go for Leave in posts but I can't recall any Leavers being especially confident.
If I was confident that the country was going Leave I'd be a lot more confident casting my own ballot for Leave. I'm tempted for Leave but view the worst case scenario as a narrow Remain vote and since I'm expecting a Remain vote that's concerning.
I think the opposite. If Remain is to win, the narrower the victory the better - it would be our only (admittedly thin) defence against a policy of total surrender to every terrifying aspect of the European project. Think David Cameron has kept the Syria migrants out for our benefit? He's done so to avoid losing this referendum. Once we're safely in for another 30 years, with a ringing endorsement, the consequences do not bear thinking about.
You are not really suggesting that David Cameron's policy on migration will change on a remain vote. He would be out before you could say 1922 committee
Remind us how that 'no ifs, no buts' pledge to reduce net migration to the tens of thousands is going.
You are merging immigration with migration when they are two separate events. David Cameron's policy on migration is the one I referred to not immigration
Hollande threatening 'consequences' for the UK if it leaves EU will I think have the opposite effect on UK voters - it will make them more determined to vote leave. we don't take kindly to threats from our old arch enemy
I am not sure about that - there is a logic to the idea that if we leave why should France, or anyone else in the EU, not play hard ball. The amount of coverage on the broadcast media today will have cut through to some no matter that leave dismiss it as nonsense
Of course they can play hard ball.
But it also risks giving two impressions:
(1) that threats are being used to persuade us to remain rather than anything more positive. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Remain might wish to remember that.
(2) it raises - in my mind - a real question about the good faith of one of the key countries within the EU. Given that so much of its structure and political outlook is based on the French model and give the promises which have been made, I am being asked to trust in the good faith of the French and others. This sort of comment does not incline me to place much reliance in their good faith, to be frank.
I just think the French would be more bloody minded then most
The French will always be bloody minded right up until the Germans bitch slap them into doing what they're told.
And the reason for staying in an organisation run like this is.....?
We go bolshie, they go bolshie. Where's the surprise?
The EU is a symptom, not a cause. A truly healthy, awake, democratic society wants nothing to do with the EU, even if bordered by it on every side, as Switzerland shows us.
Hollande threatening 'consequences' for the UK if it leaves EU will I think have the opposite effect on UK voters - it will make them more determined to vote leave. we don't take kindly to threats from our old arch enemy
I am not sure about that - there is a logic to the idea that if we leave why should France, or anyone else in the EU, not play hard ball. The amount of coverage on the broadcast media today will have cut through to some no matter that leave dismiss it as nonsense
Of course they can play hard ball.
But it also risks giving two impressions:
(1) that threats are being used to persuade us to remain rather than anything more positive. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Remain might wish to remember that.
(2) it raises - in my mind - a real question about the good faith of one of the key countries within the EU. Given that so much of its structure and political outlook is based on the French model and give the promises which have been made, I am being asked to trust in the good faith of the French and others. This sort of comment does not incline me to place much reliance in their good faith, to be frank.
I just think the French would be more bloody minded then most
The French will always be bloody minded right up until the Germans bitch slap them into doing what they're told.
And the reason for staying in an organisation run like this is.....?
Because the sky will fall in as the REMAINERS tell us.
Migrants in Greece are set to be handed envelopes of cash under a £550million EU disaster fund announced yesterday.
Brussels officials said despite the obvious dangers of giving taxpayers’ money directly to those in refugee camps to spend as they wish it would help them ‘maintain their dignity’.
Looks like the EU have been taking advice from Kids Company / Batwoman on how to run a successful operation.
One of the obvious dangers being that it helps fund terrorism or other illegal activity. You do have to wonder at the stupidity some apparently intelligent people demonstrate. Compassion is no guarantee of common-sense either, apparently.
At the least it will be used as banked payments to people smugglers.
I thought the story was misleading, or so @Charles, and @Richard_N seemed to say downthread, in that money is not currently being given directly. But was being considered.
Fair enough. I've been following the cycling this evening so haven't looked at the story directly. IF they do start giving cash payments, then the smugglers will be the first to take advantage of it. Where government lacks presence, organised crime will swiftly fill the vacuum.
Cycling is a great sport. And Laura Trott is the greatest. Half the size of her rivals but just nails it every time.
Migrants in Greece are set to be handed envelopes of cash under a £550million EU disaster fund announced yesterday.
Brussels officials said despite the obvious dangers of giving taxpayers’ money directly to those in refugee camps to spend as they wish it would help them ‘maintain their dignity’.
Looks like the EU have been taking advice from Kids Company / Batwoman on how to run a successful operation.
One of the obvious dangers being that it helps fund terrorism or other illegal activity. You do have to wonder at the stupidity some apparently intelligent people demonstrate. Compassion is no guarantee of common-sense either, apparently.
At the least it will be used as banked payments to people smugglers.
I thought the story was misleading, or so @Charles, and @Richard_N seemed to say downthread, in that money is not currently being given directly. But was being considered.
Fair enough. I've been following the cycling this evening so haven't looked at the story directly. IF they do start giving cash payments, then the smugglers will be the first to take advantage of it. Where government lacks presence, organised crime will swiftly fill the vacuum.
Cycling is a great sport. And Laura Trott is the greatest. Half the size of her rivals but just nails it every time.
Stonking last couple of laps from her to snatch gold.
Hollande threatening 'consequences' for the UK if it leaves EU will I think have the opposite effect on UK voters - it will make them more determined to vote leave. we don't take kindly to threats from our old arch enemy
I am not sure about that - there is a logic to the idea that if we leave why should France, or anyone else in the EU, not play hard ball. The amount of coverage on the broadcast media today will have cut through to some no matter that leave dismiss it as nonsense
Of course they can play hard ball.
But it also risks giving two impressions:
(1) that threats are being used to persuade us to remain rather than anything more positive. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Remain might wish to remember that.
(2) it raises - in my mind - a real question about the good faith of one of the key countries within the EU. Given that so much of its structure and political outlook is based on the French model and give the promises which have been made, I am being asked to trust in the good faith of the French and others. This sort of comment does not incline me to place much reliance in their good faith, to be frank.
I just think the French would be more bloody minded then most
The French will always be bloody minded right up until the Germans bitch slap them into doing what they're told.
And the reason for staying in an organisation run like this is.....?
We go bolshie, they go bolshie. Where's the surprise?
No such thing as an amicable divorce.
If we vote to Leave, we are exercising our democratic rights. Strange to describe democracy as "going bolshie".
Threatening to tear up a treaty which, the French not being fools, was in the interests of the French as well as the UK, in retaliation for another country making a democratic decision seems a touch petulant.
If the Scots had voted for independence, I think we should have accepted this with good grace, been generous in the post-split settlement and done so because it makes sense to be good neighbours. One would hope that some amongst the French establishment might understand this point.
'Threatening to tear up a treaty which, the French not being fools, was in the interests of the French as well as the UK, in retaliation for another country making a democratic decision seems a touch petulant.'
The clowns that are threatening to tear up the treaty will not be in government in 14 months time.
Comments
Does she have other thoughts on other issues ?
No such thing as an amicable divorce.
yes
Threatening to tear up a treaty which, the French not being fools, was in the interests of the French as well as the UK, in retaliation for another country making a democratic decision seems a touch petulant.
If the Scots had voted for independence, I think we should have accepted this with good grace, been generous in the post-split settlement and done so because it makes sense to be good neighbours. One would hope that some amongst the French establishment might understand this point.
Saqib Bhatti is joint secretary-general of Muslims for Britain.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/saqib-bhatti-eu-s-too-small-for-a-proud-and-free-britain-1-7767146
'Threatening to tear up a treaty which, the French not being fools, was in the interests of the French as well as the UK, in retaliation for another country making a democratic decision seems a touch petulant.'
The clowns that are threatening to tear up the treaty will not be in government in 14 months time.