Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

bmw535i said:

I get it. I get a desperately sad individual feeling it necessary to try and provide evidence that you own a car by taking pictures and posting them to total strangers.

It's awfully weird you know. Seriously, get a life mate

It took me just 2 minutes to prove a brexiter (and his sheep) was wrong. Again. Unprovoked too - he just rocked up and said "hey I want to imply you're a fraud with no justification whatsoever, please prove to everyone I'm a muppet who jumps to ill advised conclusions". I shouldn't have bothered, but hey he did rather ask for it. I tried to keep it polite, but oh no he had to say I was full of st. More fool him.

Repeatedly proving a sizable proportion of brexiters are mistaken and prone to ill-judgement on rather basic facts will be key to reversing the referendum result.

Baaa!

You might want to reflect on this post, it really is rather pathetic and sad.

A minor spat over ownership of a Porsche results in what you've written above,I did credit you with some intelligence, but you sound like a 9 year old schoolchild.

More insults.

You do appreciate the irony here don't you?

There is only one thing you repeatedly prove - I'm sure you don't see it past your blinkers, but it's that your mental health is deteriorating. Seek help

[anonymous-user]

This made me chuckle. I expect it'll make the usual suspects cry over their knitting though

Brexit voters one month on: I wasn't expecting that!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articles/36858065

[FiF]

jjlynn27 said:

Fastdruid said:

The point with the steel industry isn't so much about about throwing good money after bad it's that the EU (specifically the energy policies) makes production of steel (and aluminium and other energy intensive manufacturing) massively more expensive than it should be, hence uncompetitive and so loses money, especially when combined with a strong pound. Now I'm not sure that we could totally compete with say China even with "normal" energy costs but at least we'd have a fighting chance!

Just seen this. 2 things.

Energy cost has been done to oblivion on another thread, in short; energy prices for extra large users (steel industry) are higher in Germany than UK. UK was one of the countries very much supporting green taxes.
UK was pushing for lowering taxes on China's steel.

Maybe it was done to oblivion but I tuned out because a vast amount of it was stupid shouting, much like this thread has resorted to recently. I really can't be bothered to find out the bit of the other thread to see the conclusion that I obviously missed.

Nevertheless I have great difficulty rationalising your statement above with figures from HMG and the IEA, see spreadsheets below.





There's nothing sinister in showing different numbers of columns on the two extracts, exclusive tax and including tax, simply my difficulty in managing Excel on a tablet. But it seems to show, to me, that HMG and IEA are claiming energy costs pre and inclusive of tax are higher in UK than Germany and higher by quite a % over the EU15 median.

Energy costs are a very high proportion of manufacturing costs in the primary production of specialist engineering and high alloyed materials, eg aerospace material, plus secondary production into other products. This is a strategic area where UK is good and technically very competent, yet struggles. The comments by other posters that due to previous governments concentration on finance and other service sectors we have an unbalanced economy are imo valid. As are the comments that we have strategic holes in our capabilities.

Anyway be so good as to elucidate why it has previously been decided that HMG are saying the opposite to your statement above. Thanks.

Edited by FiF on Saturday 23 July 06:55

[Elysium]

bmw535i said:

This made me chuckle. I expect it'll make the usual suspects cry over their knitting though

Brexit voters one month on: I wasn't expecting that!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articles/36858065

Youth is wasted on the young as they say. Having less to lose and less people to support makes you more open to risk.

Good to see you post some actual content anyway. Although I am certain that you will respond with another insult shortly.

Regarding energy, the UK has some of the highest prices in Europe regardless of tax. This is nothing to do with green policies. It is a direct reflection of a chronic long term underinvestment in generation. As a result our grid is creaking and one bad winter will result in brownouts / blackouts.

Big users pay based on their levels of peak time usage (triad) periods, which is a tactical attempt to cut peak time usage.

[PRTVR]

jjlynn27 said:

PRTVR said:

Its not difficult, are we dependent on the financial sector for a large part of our income? Is this a good thing or would it be better to have a more balanced economy?

I really don't know how to say this differently. We seem to be very good at finance. We seem to be pretty st at making steel. Reasons are irrelevant. We are very good at technology, marketing, some manufacturing. You do what you are good at. You buy what you are crap at (simplified, I told you to look up comparative advantage, light reading and you'll understand).

I agree but I would argue that the reasons are not irrelevant, because how can you correct a problem if you do not understand it, or perhaps your view is we do nothing?
If you look at things on a purely financial level things will not make sense, but if you keep disenfranchising large parts of the country you should not be surprised if when given a chance to give London a kicking they do,
Take something simple like the construction of the new Forth road bridge, built using Chinese steel due to the fact they are dumping it under cost, not to far away in Scotland is a steel plant, short term gain in cost reduction may lead to the plant shutting down, economically it makes sense, but socially perhaps not, will not the government be seen as assisting in the destruction of jobs for short term gain in the reduced build cost.
Listening to Mrs May she understands, hopefully things will change.

[Jockman]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Jockman said:

Lol. Art 50 is very reversible. I'm relatively confident of that. Let's wait and see what we get.

What makes you think that, any links please?

Look at point 10 in the House of Lords Committee Report.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...

[anonymous-user]

Elysium said:

Youth is wasted on the young as they say. Having less to lose and less people to support makes you more open to risk.

Good to see you post some actual content anyway. Although I am certain that you will respond with another insult shortly.

Regarding energy, the UK has some of the highest prices in Europe regardless of tax. This is nothing to do with green policies. It is a direct reflection of a chronic long term underinvestment in generation. As a result our grid is creaking and one bad winter will result in brownouts / blackouts.

Big users pay based on their levels of peak time usage (triad) periods, which is a tactical attempt to cut peak time usage.

This illusion you have that I only post insults is just more evidence that you're completely blinkered and oblivious to anything that doesn't agree with your biased view and your monotonous repetition






This is not intended to be an insulting post

[Elysium]

PRTVR said:

I agree but I would argue that the reasons are not irrelevant, because how can you correct a problem if you do not understand it, or perhaps your view is we do nothing?
If you look at things on a purely financial level things will not make sense, but if you keep disenfranchising large parts of the country you should not be surprised if when given a chance to give London a kicking they do,
Take something simple like the construction of the new Forth road bridge, built using Chinese steel due to the fact they are dumping it under cost, not to far away in Scotland is a steel plant, short term gain in cost reduction may lead to the plant shutting down, economically it makes sense, but socially perhaps not, will not the government be seen as assisting in the destruction of jobs for short term gain in the reduced build cost.
Listening to Mrs May she understands, hopefully things will change.

I know some fairly significant market insiders in the steel industry. The UK is very good at making more complex 'value added' products, but the simple 'long product' structural steel produced in places like Port Talbot is not economic. I understand that one of the issues (again) is long term investment as the plant at Port Talbot needs to be run continuously and cannot be switched on and off to match production cycles. In contrast the kit at plants elsewhere in Europe is more flexible.

Chinese dumping is apparently something of a myth as they have dramatically slowed production. Our major steel construction companies are buying from European plants as they are cheaper, even after transport costs and the weak pound.

[anonymous-user]

bmw535i said:

This illusion you have that I only post insults is just more evidence that you're completely blinkered and oblivious to anything that doesn't agree with your biased view and your monotonous repetition






This is not intended to be an insulting post

I have been following this thread and to me it looks like you are posting insults.

That's not to say I am right.

No insult intended.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Jockman said:

Look at point 10 in the House of Lords Committee Report.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...

Hmmmm.

I am not a big fan of assuming you can do something simply because there is nothing stating you cannot. It doesn't say you can either.

[Elysium]

bmw535i said:

This illusion you have that I only post insults is just more evidence that you're completely blinkered and oblivious to anything that doesn't agree with your biased view and your monotonous repetition

This is not intended to be an insulting post

No it's evidence that you only post insults. Look back at your contributions to this thread. The vast majority are personal attacks just like the one above.

You keep accusing me of repetition, yet these endless personal jibes are the most repetitive thing on here.

If you don't intend this you must have a spectacular lack of self awareness?

[Jockman]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Jockman said:

Look at point 10 in the House of Lords Committee Report.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...

Hmmmm.

I am not a big fan of assuming you can do something simply because there is nothing stating you cannot. It doesn't say you can either.

If it were a bit of gossip on a forum I would be inclined to agree with you.

These seem pretty well respected Experts and it's an interesting viewpoint, not just from a UK perspective but also an EU one.

[Stickyfinger]

New day, new postings to do

[turbobloke]

Jockman said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Jockman said:

Look at point 10 in the House of Lords Committee Report.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...

Hmmmm.

I am not a big fan of assuming you can do something simply because there is nothing stating you cannot. It doesn't say you can either.

If it were a bit of gossip on a forum I would be inclined to agree with you.

These seem pretty well respected Experts and it's an interesting viewpoint, not just from a UK perspective but also an EU one.

Soon after point 10 is this:

Link said:

Both witnesses drew a distinction, however, between the law and the politics of such a scenario. While the law was clear, “the politics of it would be completely different”, according to Professor Wyatt.13 Likewise, Sir David did not think that the politics “were as easy as saying, ‘The negotiations are over and we are back to where we started’”.

Lots of things can happen per se but have an extremely low probability.

[anonymous-user]

Ghibli said:

bmw535i said:

This illusion you have that I only post insults is just more evidence that you're completely blinkered and oblivious to anything that doesn't agree with your biased view and your monotonous repetition






This is not intended to be an insulting post

I have been following this thread and to me it looks like you are posting insults.

That's not to say I am right.

No insult intended.

You are right.

As for the topic, could the uk u turn, well yes of course it could. It's not very likely though.

[Jockman]

turbobloke said:

Jockman said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Jockman said:

Look at point 10 in the House of Lords Committee Report.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...

Hmmmm.

I am not a big fan of assuming you can do something simply because there is nothing stating you cannot. It doesn't say you can either.

If it were a bit of gossip on a forum I would be inclined to agree with you.

These seem pretty well respected Experts and it's an interesting viewpoint, not just from a UK perspective but also an EU one.

Soon after point 10 is this:

Link said:

Both witnesses drew a distinction, however, between the law and the politics of such a scenario. While the law was clear, “the politics of it would be completely different”, according to Professor Wyatt.13 Likewise, Sir David did not think that the politics “were as easy as saying, ‘The negotiations are over and we are back to where we started’”.

Lots of things can happen per se but have an extremely low probability.

Absolutely. It would be horrendously messy to withdraw art 50.

[PurpleMoonlight]

turbobloke said:

Lots of things can happen per se but have an extremely low probability.

True.

Just because those advising the UK say you can withdraw your resignation, doesn't mean that those advising the remaining EU members will agree. If a contract doesn't confirm either way any half decent lawyer could argue their brief endlessly.

If I were a remaining member state though and I had spend 2 years plus working on a deal between the EU and UK and then UK decided they didn't wanted it and revoked the resignation I would be a tad pissed off to say the least.

[anonymous-user]

Elysium said:

bmw535i said:

This illusion you have that I only post insults is just more evidence that you're completely blinkered and oblivious to anything that doesn't agree with your biased view and your monotonous repetition

This is not intended to be an insulting post

No it's evidence that you only post insults. Look back at your contributions to this thread. The vast majority are personal attacks just like the one above.

You keep accusing me of repetition, yet these endless personal jibes are the most repetitive thing on here.

If you don't intend this you must have a spectacular lack of self awareness?

The thread judge has spoken

[don'tbesilly]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

bmw535i said:

I get it. I get a desperately sad individual feeling it necessary to try and provide evidence that you own a car by taking pictures and posting them to total strangers.

It's awfully weird you know. Seriously, get a life mate

It took me just 2 minutes to prove a brexiter (and his sheep) was wrong. Again. Unprovoked too - he just rocked up and said "hey I want to imply you're a fraud with no justification whatsoever, please prove to everyone I'm a muppet who jumps to ill advised conclusions". I shouldn't have bothered, but hey he did rather ask for it. I tried to keep it polite, but oh no he had to say I was full of st. More fool him.

Repeatedly proving a sizable proportion of brexiters are mistaken and prone to ill-judgement on rather basic facts will be key to reversing the referendum result.

Baaa!

You might want to reflect on this post, it really is rather pathetic and sad.

A minor spat over ownership of a Porsche results in what you've written above,I did credit you with some intelligence, but you sound like a 9 year old schoolchild.

More insults.

Yet you failed to see the insult/s in your own post as quoted above.

[jjlynn27]

FiF said:

....
Energy costs are a very high proportion of manufacturing costs in the primary production of specialist engineering and high alloyed materials, eg aerospace material, plus secondary production into other products. This is a strategic area where UK is good and technically very competent, yet struggles. The comments by other posters that due to previous governments concentration on finance and other service sectors we have an unbalanced economy are imo valid. As are the comments that we have strategic holes in our capabilities.

Anyway be so good as to elucidate why it has previously been decided that HMG are saying the opposite to your statement above. Thanks.

You are right, my statement above is wrong.

I've found my previous post with discussion on energy prices for steel producers.

jjlynn27 on 8th of April said:

Price of electricity for industrial use in Germany is lower than price of electricity in UK for x-large consumers

Prices per kWh.

Germany 8.13
UK 9.78

Data for Jan-June '15.

Source DECC.

The point was that it wasn't EU green policies that made UK energy costs high, but the base (pre-tax) cost.

I'll take it that you agree that UK was pushing for lower taxes on Chinese imports?