| The Comments |
Thank you Micky for being honest about something you really didn't know was true or not, throws a different light on your future posts about what you know on the Brexit, maybe.
Huh................now you are being just silly baz. I dont understand or even care what point you are attempting to articulate.
I only take part in forums to understand peoples attitudes or opinions and work out how they arrive at them. A form of social experiment if you like. It's possible sometimes to learn much from members responses to posts. You however have defeated me. You simply want to feel vindication which is very boring and tedious.
Back to the thread subject to please the mods. The French government have indicated today that the agreement with the UK over the border issue is now under threat and they may wave migrants through to Kent from Calais.(To please baz I heard it on bbc radio four)
The German finance minister has said the British must pay to be a member of the signgle market after Brexit along the lines of Norway.
The French president has said the British cannot enjoy the benefits of the single market without accepting some the costs. The principle cost is free movemt of labour and capital.
TTIP talks with the US and EU are almost dead after years and years of wrangle. The UK is still part of the EU so no trade deal is possible for the UK either now or after Brexit. As Obama said the Brits will be at the back of the queue.
So no signle market, no TTIP with the US just trade with the Commonwealth nations. Wonderful result. The predictable result for the UK is economic disaster. Brxit does not need to happen a commons vote could stop it and a second referendum could be held.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 30/08/2016.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Most Newspapers will have a political slant as to what they print on predictions re currency rates and the economy in general.
For those interested in exhange rates, suggest you sign up for newsletters from one the main currency dealing houses. Thes won't have the same political agenda and ones such as XE.com are American owned so won't be biased one way or another on the Brexit issue.
It has been argued for a long time though that the 'fair' rate for the £ against the Euro is around 1.3 and against the $ 1.5. Although the strength of the £ has improved in last day or two, it is a long way for the so called 'fair' value.
Very much depends on which side of the fence you sit whether a weak £ is good or bad, but there are a shed full of price rises coming for those based in the UK, due to the £/$ rate with a high proportion of UK imports priced in $
0
Like
|
Apology accepted Baz, but
'Maybe what I should have said was they haven't risen any more since Brexit then all other times before Brexit...But I didn't.'
That's because they didn't. Unless you have some figures to show otherwise - there was a marked increase following Brexit. As compared to before the vote. Of course there will be periods when there have been other spikes but that does not negate the Brexit effect on the (increased) number of hate crimes.
0
Like
|
The Met's statistics record a total of 816 Islamophobic hate crimes in the 12 months to July 2015, up from 478 over the same period in 2013-14.
It would seem that Brexit is getting the blame for just about everything, nothing to do with the general populations feeling towards those who are on the recieving end of hate crimes then.
0
Like
|
Do you think Theresa Mary May reads this forum?.
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
0
Like
|
From The Independant:
A total of 3,076 incidents were recorded across the country between 16 and 30 June – a dramatic increase on the 915 reports recorded over the same period in 2015.
The biggest number of recorded incidents came on 25 June – the day after the result of the EU referendum – when there were 289 hate crime related incidents.
No Brexit effect?
0
Like
|
Following the Brexit vote there has been a panic about an apparent ‘spike’ in hate crime. An increase of 57 per cent was widely reported, and, on Twitter, a new hashtag, #PostRefRacism, started trending, with tweeters listing incidents from around Britain. It seems many people, both online and offline, have had personal experience of post-Brexit, racist Britain.
Any incident of racism or xenophobia is abhorrent and should be challenged. But the speed with which Remainers have exploited this apparent surge – in what is, at this point, largely anecdotal reports – has been shameful. Acting like the propaganda wing of the EU establishment, they have rushed to confirm the prejudices of the elites by arguing that these vague statistics and endless tweet allegations show just how racist the working-class, Leave-voting public is.
The media have been all over it. One BBC reporter asked if the vote had opened a ‘tidal wave of hatred’. Numerous articles in the Guardian have claimed that Brexit has ‘unleashed’ racist sentiment across the country. One commentator seriously claimed that ‘every Leave voter’ had encouraged racism – which was ironic, given that the same commentator voted to remain in an institution responsible for the deaths of thousands of non-European migrants in the Mediterranean every year. The onset of panic has revealed how the very publications and commentators who once claimed to stand up for the working class in fact view working-class people as a violent, racist horde.
This is unjustifiable. While many of the accounts of hate crime that have emerged online and in the media have been disturbing, others are not what they seem. Take the widely circulated image of a group of protesters from Newcastle carrying a sign that reads ‘Stop immigration, start repatriation’. Many Remainers jumped on the photo as an example of the racism unleashed by Brexit. However, the photographer took to Twitter to distance herself from the backlash, pointing out that the far-right had a longstanding minority presence in Newcastle (an area that narrowly voted to Remain) and that the demo was not a direct response to the referendum. Northumbria Police, who cover the Newcastle area, have indicated that there has been ‘no spike’ in racist incidents reported to them over the weekend.
Another much-retweeted picture, from an EDL rally in Sheldon, Birmingham, showed around 30 EDL protesters chanting at passers-by. Again, the protest was held up as an example of ‘post-Brexit Britain’. But reports made clear that the event – involving 30 saddos – had been planned for months, and passed, according to the police, ‘without incident’. Not only was the demonstration a damp squib (which is hardly surprising considering the EDL has haemorrhaged support in recent years); it would also have taken place even if Remain had won the referendum. In other words, two of the most prominent examples of post-referendum racism have nothing to do with the referendum at all.
0
Like
|
Well, quoting newspapers (again) and the Express has a boom in the foreign investment to UK since Brexit. Moving over to the Guardian and it say 5.7 billion quid was taken out of UK following Brexit. Similar conflicting stories appear in the FT and the Telegraph.
Really, I wonder what the effect will be if when UK does eventually leave.
To me, there have been some considerable affects. The lower pound to euro value means we have lost nearly 400 euro a month from our pension. Considerable but, fortunately, we can weather it. The other one is saving in my UK bank. We keep a fund for emergencies/holidays/car repairs or whatever. Because we may need it quickly it is called an instant access account. I have just been informed that, due to rate cuts by the BoE, the £25,000 in there will now attract £2.50 a year in interest at 0.01%. The 2 year (untouchable or you lose the interest) bond now pays a magnificent 0.9% interest.
And I don't care what some of you claim. I have had an extended stay in UK due to family reasons and the main reason for the out vote was immigration. People may talk about bendy bananas, loss of control, the EU costs a fortune (though not as much as was claimed), laws being made outside UK (again, not as much as was claimed) but eventually everyone I discussed it with came around to the immigration point. Every one of them.
Knowing the words to the third verse of God Save the Queen may be all well and good for the nationalist and "getting our country back" brigade but it doesn't pay the bills.
0
Like
|
everyone I discussed it with came around to the immigration point. Every one of them.
What part of the country was this true in?
I live in the home counties.
Conversation early in the campaign (when it came into conversation at all) was mainly of the 'which way will you vote' & 'why'. In my circle I cannot remember immigration once being any part of the reason. It was raised by those who wished to remain but that was mainly to accuse campaigners and possibly by inference outers of being racist. There was a strange assumption by 'inners' that everyone felt as they did. And some surprise when they found themselves outnumbered. Otherwise more important subjects like the rotten weather were the main topic of conversation.
Two things raised the prominence of the referendum in discussion:
The local MP declared that he was going to vote 'in' when a poll of his constituents indicated that they would vote out by a significant margin.
The murder of Joe Cox.
The first raised the discussion of BREXIT in the priority of items to be discussed and the second did raise the discussion of racisim (and pursuaded some to vote in). But I never met anyone who was of the 'xxx' persuasion as you might have expected reading some reports of the press and the BBC. People on both sides of the argument however felt that immigration needed to be brought under control and the argument then was how to acheive it given the participants differing views on membership of the EU. But the main reasons quoted by either side for their decision had nothing directly to do with immigration.
BTW the weather has been much better since we voted out.
0
Like
|
@tteedd
BTW the weather has been much better since we voted out.
Liar.
0
Like
|
@tteedd
BTW the weather has been much better since we voted out.
Liar.
Maybe it just seems that way. Maybe I'm happy as larry (or Nigel?).
But it did reach the low 30s on three separate days last week. How often does that happen in the UK? Rained heavily on Sunday - but what do you expect on a bank holiday week-end?
But in a way you are right, because I would have probably made the same tongue in cheek comment even with lousy weather given my remarks earlier in the reply.
0
Like
|
If it is emigration you are worried ,The EU is still adamant that Turkey is going to be part of the EU yes 70 million of them with the key of the front door.
0
Like
|
I have written previously of a new political nationalism sweeping western countries. It’s partly a fear response to attack by terrorists and mass refugee immigration. However it is also in my view a response to perceived public failure on the part of western societies to deal with negative economic conditions after the great recession. Those factors came to the fore front in British public opinion just at the wrong time when the referendum was being held. History is littered with bad timing and its consequence.
Brexit will not prevent or change any of these negative factors from reaching their natural conclusions. Political ideas and support for them are like fashion, they come and go but more menacing they have the potential to do enormous damage and destroy social cohesion.
The European Union politically has always stood for what is decent in human existence. Fairness, solidarity and co-operation between neighbouring nations. I have even heard it described as the political wing of Christianity or the Catholic Church.
Now Britain seeks a divorce from that the real worrying question should be this. What is the political and economic future of a Britain separate from the most successful single market on the planet and a large section of world trade agreements?
I now read that major nations within the EU are lining up to poach UK national companies and institutions to relocate to their capital cities and offering sweet heart deals so to do. Who would blame them for that? Britain is turning its back on success and going it alone taking a ‘leap in the dark’ it was said. A Britain with a very right wing government, neo- nationalists biting their heels and a useless ineffective political opposition.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
3
Like
|
** EDITED - Against forum rules **
This message was last edited by EOS Team on 8/31/2016 2:45:00 PM.
_______________________
Done the Spain thing Happier in the UK
0
Like
|
Hi Mickyfigg, you are the man.
''EU are lining up to poach UK national companies and institutions to relocate to their capital cities and offering sweet heart deals so to do.''
Just like Ireland did with Apple
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
1
Like
|
Apple is a US multinational company and was based in Luxemburg not the City of London. Ireland offered them a sweetheart tax deal now deemed illegal. Other nations will try the same tactic to lure and tempt companies who need to stay within the single market.
The Cities banks currently finance many EU company projects within the single market. After a hard Brexit, tariffs and restrictions will be imposed by the EU. It is common sense for many companies to relocate within the EU. Right now they are waiting for the government to make crucial decisions on Brexit, and then watch this space.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
I thought Apple iTunes was the only division of Apple based in Luxembourg channeling all the iTunes profits.
0
Like
|
According to this https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/30/apple-pay-back-taxes-eu-ruling-ireland-state-aid
Richard Murphy, a tax campaigner and a professor in international political economy at City University in London, said: “This is a great day for the sovereignty of the EU’s nations when it comes to tax. They will now be able to choose their own tax policies knowing another state should not be consciously undermining them when doing so. The Irish state has for too long been committed to tax abuse, unfair competition and secrecy, all of which are designed to undermine fair competition and increase inequality.”
Prof Louise Gracia of Warwick University business school said: “This ruling is a serious attempt at curtailing the power large multinationals have in avoiding their tax liabilities, and sends a warning to countries that facilitate hard-edged corporate tax minimisation strategies.” She added: “It also shines a spotlight on the paltry levels of corporate tax that large multinationals are actually paying. Even if we accept the job and wealth creation arguments put forward by multinationals as mitigation against tax liability, this has to be within reason.”
Toby Quantrill, Christian Aid’s principal adviser on economic justice, said: “The staggering amount of money at stake here suggests that millions of citizens are paying a painfully high price for multinationals’ cosy tax deals with certain governments. “This is not a one-off situation – it is part of a damaging race to the bottom in which governments are competing on who can offer multinationals the lowest tax bill. It’s time to get multinationals’ tax affairs out in the open, so we can all see how much they are actually contributing to the rest of society.”
In the US Peter Kenny, senior market strategist at Global Markets Advisory Group, said it was not yet clear which side would ultimately prevail, but that the ruling was a watershed moment. “There’s no telling whether the verdict will stand on appeal, but we know that the landscape is changing for US corporations in the EU.” He described Vestager’s ruling as “just the tip of the spear – an enormously important ruling” because US-based companies “have traditionally used the EU as a way of circumventing a higher US corporate tax code.”
This message was last edited by ads on 31/08/2016.
0
Like
|
Rynair boss Michael O'Leary has urged the Irish government to tell the EU to 'f*** off' over its landmark tax ruling that ordered Apple to pay £11billion in back tax.
The European Commission was heavily criticised for the ruling, which accused the US tech giant of unduly benefiting from Ireland's attractive tax breaks over the last two decades.
Outspoken Irish businessman Mr O'Leary dubbed it 'bizarre' and advised the Irish government, which opposed the ruling, to defy the EU, insisting each country has its autonomy to make its own tax decisions. Rynair boss Michael O'Leary has urged the Irish government to tell the EU to 'f*** off' over its landmark tax ruling that ordered Apple to pay £11billion in back tax
He said: 'Frankly the Irish government should turn around - they shouldn't even appeal the decision - they should just write a letter to Europe and tell them politely to f**k off.
'The idea that you have the state aid mob - who've had more court verdicts overturned than any other department in Europe in the last 20 years - come along 10 years after the fact and say, 'no we didn't like that, we think you should have done something else', is frankly bizarre.'
0
Like
|
The question then is should millions of citizens pay for multinationals "cosy" tax deals with certain Governments who have self interests to benefit at the expense of others, and does this work in the wider perspective to the benefit of the few as opposed to the benefit of the many? Are Multinationals now laughing all the way to the Bank as they play off one Government against another with an ever downward impact on the vast majority of citizens? Has the balance of fairness not reached a highly questionable limit?
At what point does the wider issue of fair moral and ethical compliance kick in, especially during challenging periods of austerity brought about by financial institutions who also demonstrated little regard for citizens best interests and paid scant regard to regulation and compliance?
1
Like
|