advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... XI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe some of the 7000 people who received food parcels in the North East at Christmas have a different view on government spending.

Not according your previous post. You seem to think that instead of demanding the Tory government spending is increased, they were content to reduce immigration. All it took was a mindless slogan to 'take back control' and their minds were right off austerity, government spending or lack of.
 
I quite like that we can make our own way in the world now. Just like what the Scottish Nationalists dream of, we are not beholden to a far away non empathetic self interested pratocracy.
We now have a World - Beating Westminster government* in charge instead of some overseas bureaucrats that never asked my opinion about anything.
*Yes that's a joke, but at least I have some say in holding them to account.

You have no more, or less "say" than you did before. Unless you can point to these things that were holding you back?
 
The EU is contravening international law by placing a customs border in the Irish Sea. The GFA is an international legal agreement.

You could, I suppose, argue that the UK is also breaking the GFA by having signed the NI Protocol. If so, it makes for an interesting legal conundrum.

The EU, incidentally, is probably also breaking international law (WTO/MFN) by granting countries such as Japan and New Zealand greater equivalence than it does the UK in financial services and SPS checks.
Learned opinion of Rumpole of The Telegraph?
 
You mentioned China's human rights records as a bit of an afterthought following your gushing resumé of her prowess in manufacturing, of which we are all perfectly well aware.

bit more of a threat to the U.K. than some imagined threat from Brussels.

Thanks for the links, though you might be surprised to know that I had already read the FT piece (yes, read!) only yesterday. Yes, the UK has a productivity problem, one discussed by myself on these forums in the past. However, that's not what you said prior to your narrative sobering up. You said that UK was a 'spiv capitalists wonderland dumping crap produced by people who have little or no protection under law', a bit of a travesty of the truth, if you'll forgive me. Sure, we have evolved into a services-based economy, and yes, China makes (at the moment) iPhones, and ICBMs. This is Comparative Advantage. Perhaps I'm spoiled. I have a friend who runs a successful company manufacturing satellite components and the spar sections for Airbus A220 aircraft, another who services and warehouses thousands of jet engines, both of them based here in Essex, not Essen or Shenzhen. For all of its extraordinary prowess in the engineering, automotive and pharma sectors though, you can be certain that the crappy plastic duck you have floating in your bath was made in capitalist-totalitarian China, probably using something not massively unlike slave Labours.

Just because you know a “couple of people” in hi tech manufacturing does not mean the U.K. is a technological powerhouse, lots of countries have hi tech companies, Portugal, Croatia, .... it’s the percentage of the economy that is in that area that matters as you well know.Companies in Korea and Taiwan have committed to spend the ten billion plus to build the next generation of wafer fabs, I don’t remember any British company in any area making that kind of commitment to investment.
 
Learned opinion of Rumpole of The Telegraph?

Actually, no, but in an interesting development of the theme you will have already noticed that the Telegraph is this morning reporting that a group which includes David Trimble, (who you will recall as one of the chief architects of the GFA) has issued notification of intent to take not the EU but our own government to court. The case will rest on the premise that the 'NIP flies in the face of the Act of Union of 1800, and of the GFA.'

You heard it here first, weeks ago, in exactly the same words. I was told, several times, that I didn't know what I was talking about.
 
Latest report on uk technology sector which apparently is 3rd behind the US and China and much larger than any other in Europe. https://technation.io/news/2019-a-record-year-for-uk-tech/


That is third for VC capital, not investment overall. Yes, the UK has some good innovative companies, just not enough of them. If you look at the report the companies that they mention as unicorns include Trainline and a betting company neither of which are going to strike terror in the heart of the UKs peer competitors in tech.
 
That is third for VC capital, not investment overall. Yes, the UK has some good innovative companies, just not enough of them. If you look at the report the companies that they mention as unicorns include Trainline and a betting company neither of which are going to strike terror in the heart of the UKs peer competitors in tech.
Yes, I scanned the list of companies mentioned- not exactly what I was expecting. The article read like an aspirational PR puff piece.
Still, it’s great that Boris Johnson did so much to seed the market when he was MoL,

MIu2aOy.jpg


Jenny Does Tech
 
Yes, I scanned the list of companies mentioned- not exactly what I was expecting. The article read like an aspirational PR puff piece.
Still, it’s great that Boris Johnson did so much to seed the market when he was MoL,

MIu2aOy.jpg


Jenny Does Tech
I would. Not Johnson obvs
 
Not according your previous post. You seem to think that instead of demanding the Tory government spending is increased, they were content to reduce immigration. All it took was a mindless slogan to 'take back control' and their minds were right off austerity, government spending or lack of.
It was far from a 'mindless slogan'.

It was a smart slogan, particularly because it could be interpreted on different levels.

Undoubtedly, when accompanied by the migrant poster, it could seem specific to an anti-immigrant stance.

But there is also the concept of change within it too, and who doesn't want to vote for something aspirational ?

Fwiw, I really don't know what you or I do with the racist or xenophobic group in the UK. I accept that everyone has the right to an opinion.

What's your suggestion? Would you ban their vote and then evict them ?
 
It was far from a 'mindless slogan'.

It was a smart slogan, particularly because it could be interpreted on different levels.

Undoubtedly, when accompanied by the migrant poster, it could seem specific to an anti-immigrant stance.

But there is also the concept of change within it too, and who doesn't want to vote for something aspirational ?

Fwiw, I really don't know what you or I do with the racist or xenophobic group in the UK. I accept that everyone has the right to an opinion.

What's your suggestion? Would you ban their vote and then evict them ?

You could start by challenging mindless acceptance of a trite slogan, or the absurd conflation of immigration with a government's deliberate determination not to fund services or provide adequate infrastructure for the population as a whole.

You could be not so supine, when frauds are trying to divert your attention from their deliberate policy of enriching their backers and donors at the expense of the population as a whole.

Isn't your business non-EU immigration, in which case might be nice to preface your desire to reduce FOM in that context.
 
Not according your previous post. You seem to think that instead of demanding the Tory government spending is increased, they were content to reduce immigration. All it took was a mindless slogan to 'take back control' and their minds were right off austerity, government spending or lack of.
Whatever the reason it certainly helped achieve a Brexit win.
 
That is third for VC capital, not investment overall. Yes, the UK has some good innovative companies, just not enough of them. If you look at the report the companies that they mention as unicorns include Trainline and a betting company neither of which are going to strike terror in the heart of the UKs peer competitors in tech.
The UK economy has been open for decades. Many an aspirational company has been bought out by an international competitor.

This coincides with a time when capital shifts quickly and with it work.

If you or I buy our next phone/speaker/car/amplifier/etc from a company which production in China/nearby, then aren't we complicit in the global corporatist plans?

I thought hifi was one of the last refuges of a belief system which valued local entreprise. One where TCO was more important than the ticket price.
 
You could start by challenging mindless acceptance of a trite slogan, or the absurd conflation of immigration with a government's deliberate determination not to fund services or provide adequate infrastructure for the population as a whole.
...
So why couldn't my Leave vote be construed as just that, a challenge?

I've said this point before : I believe that if you support mass migration then you must reinvest the bulk of the benefits back into the places which are hit hardest by the inevitable change. If you do not take this approach, then you risk a political backlash. We have had mass change at a time of mass local authority budget cuts.

London could obviously cope much better with change compared with parts of the North. I recall a figure where spend per capita on public transport in London was 24 times higher in London compared to Sunderland. At some point, the voters in Sunderland are going to notice this.
 
So why couldn't my Leave vote be construed as just that, a challenge?

I've said this point before : I believe that if you support mass migration then you must reinvest the bulk of the benefits back into the places which are hit hardest by the inevitable change. If you do not take this approach, then you risk a political backlash. We have had mass change at a time of mass local authority budget cuts.

London could obviously cope much better with change compared with parts of the North. I recall a figure where spend per capita on public transport in London was 24 times higher in London compared to Sunderland. At some point, the voters in Sunderland are going to notice this.

They risk the backlash, but successfully divert it to the immigrants themselves. The Leave vote was not a challenge, it was acceptance of deflection. The voters in Sunderland will notice, so why don't they blame those responsible instead of those who were not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top