Bombardier - A sign of things to come?
Discussion
Ali G said:
And....
We have another Brexit thread.
Brexit is going to have a huge impact over the coming years to every one of us. Get used to hearing about it.We have another Brexit thread.
Ali G said:
What fun - there was a vote some time ago similar to democracy but apparently not, since it has not been accepted as the will of the majority.
Having the vote and it being the "will of the majority" at that moment in time doesn't mean we should ignore any negative effects as they are revealed ** Some will try, of course. They'll scream "project fear" until they're blue in the face!
mike9009 said:
To be fair if I were you I would not respond to these jibes. (....and I have been guilty of responding too!! 
). In your shoes I would only respond to reasoned debate....... to keep these topics on track.
Although, you seem reasonably robust to it!
I find the debunking of debate by name calling pro-EU posters or EU officials (and vice versa....), a sign of the posters lack of reason and understanding. It is a white flag to me and therefore does not require a response It is in a similar vein to 'catchy' tabloid headlines designed to attract a certain readership.
Lets play the ball, not the player....
Mike
If only you had been as prompt in condemning the kinds of insults and slurs that slasher et al have been peddling over the past months. ). In your shoes I would only respond to reasoned debate....... to keep these topics on track.Although, you seem reasonably robust to it!
I find the debunking of debate by name calling pro-EU posters or EU officials (and vice versa....), a sign of the posters lack of reason and understanding. It is a white flag to me and therefore does not require a response It is in a similar vein to 'catchy' tabloid headlines designed to attract a certain readership.
Lets play the ball, not the player....
Mike
As it is, those who frequent these forums enough know full well how those guys operate. It's small wonder that peoples irritation with the wilful trolling, smears, innuendo, deliberate mis-conflation of news items as being linked to Brexit and such like spills over from time to time, resulting in regrettable outbursts.
Lets be clear though, the Boeing/Bombardier thing has zilch to do with Brexit and the EU. Whether the EU would go into bat (or not) on our behalf has zilch to do with them being offended "up yours Delors" or any other such nonsense theories espoused by slasher et al.
The information as to what is driving this is out there. The likely resolution will come in the next few months provided that Bombardier Canada engages with the process.
And its amazing that when the EU fails to act on this (as they most certainly will fail to do) the Remainers will claim that this is justified due to Brexit, rather than it being the case that the EU was never going to act anyway! But lets assume that the EU should act, but refuses to do so due to the "insult" of Brexit... (as slasher suggests), then one would have to ask why we would even continue to pay into the EU from this point onwards? After all, as has been pointed out, we haven't left yet, we are still fully paid up members and will be for a couple of years (ish). Is slasher saying that being denied access to the swimming pool and squash course at your gym, even though your subs were fully up to date, would be justified cos you'd said you would not be renewing your membership next year? Is that how this works?
Either the EU should act or it should not. If it should, and it does not, then that speaks very badly for the club.
In summary, I don't like people who disagree with me. This has nothing to do with Brexit but if it did, I just bet the EU wouldn't lift a finger, but again, it hasn't but I'll write a long paragraph anyway about a hypothetical scenario that entirely fits my entrenched belief system.
Covered it Andy?
Covered it Andy?
mx5nut said:
Having the vote and it being the "will of the majority" at that moment in time doesn't mean we should ignore any negative effects as they are revealed *
* Some will try, of course. They'll scream "project fear" until they're blue in the face!
There should be many positive and many negative aspects of brexit, anyone who claims otherwise is a fool, the difference is the emphasis an individual may put on various aspects.* Some will try, of course. They'll scream "project fear" until they're blue in the face!
The issue I'm seeing again and again though is contributions to threads being mere opportunities for "there I told you so, brexit is terrible and this (thing I just found out about) is why" rather than "this is an issue that may worsen under brexit so what can we do". Of course, theres the cry wolf aspect, where people are so sick of hearing it its easy to write off a valid point as being just another "remoaner".
hairyben said:
There should be many positive and many negative aspects of brexit, anyone who claims otherwise is a fool, the difference is the emphasis an individual may put on various aspects.
The issue I'm seeing again and again though is contributions to threads being mere opportunities for "there I told you so, brexit is terrible and this (thing I just found out about) is why" rather than "this is an issue that may worsen under brexit so what can we do". Of course, theres the cry wolf aspect, where people are so sick of hearing it its easy to write off a valid point as being just another "remoaner".
What are you personally going to do to resolve any problem, nay, opportunity that Brexit might bring? Talk on a car forum about it, or something more effective?The issue I'm seeing again and again though is contributions to threads being mere opportunities for "there I told you so, brexit is terrible and this (thing I just found out about) is why" rather than "this is an issue that may worsen under brexit so what can we do". Of course, theres the cry wolf aspect, where people are so sick of hearing it its easy to write off a valid point as being just another "remoaner".
Eddie Strohacker said:
In summary, I don't like people who disagree with me. This has nothing to do with Brexit but if it did, I just bet the EU wouldn't lift a finger, but again, it hasn't but I'll write a long paragraph anyway about a hypothetical scenario that entirely fits my entrenched belief system.
Covered it Andy?
Nope, not even close. I hope you won't be offended if I don't bother trying to explain. Covered it Andy?
andymadmak said:
mike9009 said:
To be fair if I were you I would not respond to these jibes. (....and I have been guilty of responding too!! ). In your shoes I would only respond to reasoned debate....... to keep these topics on track.
Although, you seem reasonably robust to it!
I find the debunking of debate by name calling pro-EU posters or EU officials (and vice versa....), a sign of the posters lack of reason and understanding. It is a white flag to me and therefore does not require a response It is in a similar vein to 'catchy' tabloid headlines designed to attract a certain readership.
Lets play the ball, not the player....
Mike
If only you had been as prompt in condemning the kinds of insults and slurs that slasher et al have been peddling over the past months. ). In your shoes I would only respond to reasoned debate....... to keep these topics on track.Although, you seem reasonably robust to it!
I find the debunking of debate by name calling pro-EU posters or EU officials (and vice versa....), a sign of the posters lack of reason and understanding. It is a white flag to me and therefore does not require a response It is in a similar vein to 'catchy' tabloid headlines designed to attract a certain readership.
Lets play the ball, not the player....
Mike
As it is, those who frequent these forums enough know full well how those guys operate. It's small wonder that peoples irritation with the wilful trolling, smears, innuendo, deliberate mis-conflation of news items as being linked to Brexit and such like spills over from time to time, resulting in regrettable outbursts.
Lets be clear though, the Boeing/Bombardier thing has zilch to do with Brexit and the EU. Whether the EU would go into bat (or not) on our behalf has zilch to do with them being offended "up yours Delors" or any other such nonsense theories espoused by slasher et al.
The information as to what is driving this is out there. The likely resolution will come in the next few months provided that Bombardier Canada engages with the process.
And its amazing that when the EU fails to act on this (as they most certainly will fail to do) the Remainers will claim that this is justified due to Brexit, rather than it being the case that the EU was never going to act anyway! But lets assume that the EU should act, but refuses to do so due to the "insult" of Brexit... (as slasher suggests), then one would have to ask why we would even continue to pay into the EU from this point onwards? After all, as has been pointed out, we haven't left yet, we are still fully paid up members and will be for a couple of years (ish). Is slasher saying that being denied access to the swimming pool and squash course at your gym, even though your subs were fully up to date, would be justified cos you'd said you would not be renewing your membership next year? Is that how this works?
Either the EU should act or it should not. If it should, and it does not, then that speaks very badly for the club.
Then a "nothing to do with the EU"
Then a "the EU should act as we are still in the club, can still use the swimming pool"
Putting aside the obvious contradiction that perhaps this could after all be a trade issue the EU could step into bat about for one of its members, it surely is the obvious that our position to request help is severely compromised.
The UK position is really weak in the brexit talks - it is interesting, but worrying, to observe that we are even in no position to demand the transition period - it is only a polite request. We need it more than the EU. The compromises will be interesting, but it is a concern as to how slowly things are moving as Mar 19 approaches.
///ajd said:
Deptford Draylons said:
///ajd said:
Reminds me of the time that someone thought that the appropriate response to a post was to call me a "spacker/spaz". What a classy dude.
That would have been me. You earned it when you talked so much cap on the Nissan deal, with illegal state aid talk and you trying to me me the Nissan boss smiling at the awaiting press pack was proof he was able to just demand compensation from HMG when he felt like. For that you got called a spacker.You are a proven liar and fantasist here peddling the same old ' were doomed/you're racist' message. Sorry, but we may as well be clear on it.
You seem to think its OK to effectively call someone a spastic - as if being disabled is some form of acceptable insult. Why not go the whole hog and call me Joey Deacon?
Most would agree I think that this is pretty unpleasant, in fact it is considered one of the most taboo insults in the UK. Ultimately it is embarrassing for those who use it, seemingly unaware of how it makes them come across.
HTH
///ajd said:
how do you post a boucing smiley?
OK Point your mouse to Smilies it's along the top of the reply box second from the left
You are presented with a list
Go down the list till you find the bouncing one and copy the code to the right
:bounce:
There you go - how to post a bouncing smiley
Other alternative smilies are available
///ajd said:
Deptford Draylons said:
///ajd said:
Reminds me of the time that someone thought that the appropriate response to a post was to call me a "spacker/spaz". What a classy dude.
That would have been me. You earned it when you talked so much cap on the Nissan deal, with illegal state aid talk and you trying to me me the Nissan boss smiling at the awaiting press pack was proof he was able to just demand compensation from HMG when he felt like. For that you got called a spacker.You are a proven liar and fantasist here peddling the same old ' were doomed/you're racist' message. Sorry, but we may as well be clear on it.
You seem to think its OK to effectively call someone a spastic - as if being disabled is some form of acceptable insult. Why not go the whole hog and call me Joey Deacon?
Most would agree I think that this is pretty unpleasant, in fact it is considered one of the most taboo insults in the UK. Ultimately it is embarrassing for those who use it, seemingly unaware of how it makes them come across.
On a related point, I also object to you pissing down my back and telling me its raining all the time. If you don't already work in some kinda PR role, then you really should. Calling you the Lord Haw-Haw of Brexit Remain is very apt because you don't even try to have any balance, its just pure propaganda with you. That is what I really object to.
MellowshipSlinky said:
Air Baltic say they plan to order another 14 CS100's.
Stating that no other manufacturer makes the type of plane they want.
This, the growth is in intracontinental point to point flights, with 100-150 seats, the only Boeing options are too large and too inefficient. The fact they are trying to use legislation to stop the sales isn't a sign that Bombardier will have trouble as the rest of the world market will not be affected and Boeing can't compete on their current product .Stating that no other manufacturer makes the type of plane they want.
maffski said:
This, the growth is in intracontinental point to point flights, with 100-150 seats, the only Boeing options are too large and too inefficient. The fact they are trying to use legislation to stop the sales isn't a sign that Bombardier will have trouble as the rest of the world market will not be affected and Boeing can't compete on their current product .
It's interesting to consider whether off shore operators can get around the tariffs and either operate from outside into the US or lease the ac somehow for use in the US. No doubt other regs may preclude this. It is great that we make the wings on what could be a successful sub boeing/airbus product.
PS DD - you do realise it is not me you are offending by calling me a spacker? It seems not. And this is the bombardier thread, where there is a 219% chance of rain. Perhaps you'd like to tell us how these tariffs are good news and the sun is shining?
andymadmak said:
If only you had been as prompt in condemning the kinds of insults and slurs that slasher et al have been peddling over the past months.
As it is, those who frequent these forums enough know full well how those guys operate. It's small wonder that peoples irritation with the wilful trolling, smears, innuendo, deliberate mis-conflation of news items as being linked to Brexit and such like spills over from time to time, resulting in regrettable outbursts.
Lets be clear though, the Boeing/Bombardier thing has zilch to do with Brexit and the EU. Whether the EU would go into bat (or not) on our behalf has zilch to do with them being offended "up yours Delors" or any other such nonsense theories espoused by slasher et al.
The information as to what is driving this is out there. The likely resolution will come in the next few months provided that Bombardier Canada engages with the process.
And its amazing that when the EU fails to act on this (as they most certainly will fail to do) the Remainers will claim that this is justified due to Brexit, rather than it being the case that the EU was never going to act anyway! But lets assume that the EU should act, but refuses to do so due to the "insult" of Brexit... (as slasher suggests), then one would have to ask why we would even continue to pay into the EU from this point onwards? After all, as has been pointed out, we haven't left yet, we are still fully paid up members and will be for a couple of years (ish). Is slasher saying that being denied access to the swimming pool and squash course at your gym, even though your subs were fully up to date, would be justified cos you'd said you would not be renewing your membership next year? Is that how this works?
Either the EU should act or it should not. If it should, and it does not, then that speaks very badly for the club.
Leader of the tory party in scotland As it is, those who frequent these forums enough know full well how those guys operate. It's small wonder that peoples irritation with the wilful trolling, smears, innuendo, deliberate mis-conflation of news items as being linked to Brexit and such like spills over from time to time, resulting in regrettable outbursts.
Lets be clear though, the Boeing/Bombardier thing has zilch to do with Brexit and the EU. Whether the EU would go into bat (or not) on our behalf has zilch to do with them being offended "up yours Delors" or any other such nonsense theories espoused by slasher et al.
The information as to what is driving this is out there. The likely resolution will come in the next few months provided that Bombardier Canada engages with the process.
And its amazing that when the EU fails to act on this (as they most certainly will fail to do) the Remainers will claim that this is justified due to Brexit, rather than it being the case that the EU was never going to act anyway! But lets assume that the EU should act, but refuses to do so due to the "insult" of Brexit... (as slasher suggests), then one would have to ask why we would even continue to pay into the EU from this point onwards? After all, as has been pointed out, we haven't left yet, we are still fully paid up members and will be for a couple of years (ish). Is slasher saying that being denied access to the swimming pool and squash course at your gym, even though your subs were fully up to date, would be justified cos you'd said you would not be renewing your membership next year? Is that how this works?
Either the EU should act or it should not. If it should, and it does not, then that speaks very badly for the club.
“I think over-optimism and not recognising that there are practical realities that have to be faced, that have to be worked through and that complexity is not something you just skip over, that you actually have to work through, I think sells people short.”
This is actually two questions:
Once we leave, it will be Canada and the UK.
The argument as to whether the UK (60M) has a larger influence/sway on trade disputes than the EU (440M) is well trodden.
Your questions don't undermine the points made effectively by Mike.
I suspect there will be backtracking on the tariffs as they are so outrageous - but who knows what Trump will do - that Ford factory in Mexico was soon toast.
jsf said:
1. I would appreciate if ///ajd would explain to me how our membership of the EU helps the Bombardier workers in this particular case.
The EU has a record in the WTO of defending our interests, usually with the US - and has done so in the past. The EU raises the second most disputes with the WTO, only second to the US - who seem to be the focus of many issues. jsf said:
2. Could it not be argued that Bombardier is a good example of how high tech industry partnerships work well without the requirement of joint membership of a large block such as the EU, as the Northern Ireland and Canadian plants working together is technologically and commercially successful.
Yes, to a point, but Bombardier Belfast is operating within the EU. As it stands Bombardier have the protection of Canada and the EU against protectionist US actions such as this. Once we leave, it will be Canada and the UK.
The argument as to whether the UK (60M) has a larger influence/sway on trade disputes than the EU (440M) is well trodden.
Your questions don't undermine the points made effectively by Mike.
I suspect there will be backtracking on the tariffs as they are so outrageous - but who knows what Trump will do - that Ford factory in Mexico was soon toast.
///ajd said:
This is actually two questions:
Once we leave, it will be Canada and the UK.
The argument as to whether the UK (60M) has a larger influence/sway on trade disputes than the EU (440M) is well trodden.
Your questions don't undermine the points made effectively by Mike.
I suspect there will be backtracking on the tariffs as they are so outrageous - but who knows what Trump will do - that Ford factory in Mexico was soon toast.
You would expect the EU to raise the second most disputes purely based on its size.jsf said:
1. I would appreciate if ///ajd would explain to me how our membership of the EU helps the Bombardier workers in this particular case.
The EU has a record in the WTO of defending our interests, usually with the US - and has done so in the past. The EU raises the second most disputes with the WTO, only second to the US - who seem to be the focus of many issues. jsf said:
2. Could it not be argued that Bombardier is a good example of how high tech industry partnerships work well without the requirement of joint membership of a large block such as the EU, as the Northern Ireland and Canadian plants working together is technologically and commercially successful.
Yes, to a point, but Bombardier Belfast is operating within the EU. As it stands Bombardier have the protection of Canada and the EU against protectionist US actions such as this. Once we leave, it will be Canada and the UK.
The argument as to whether the UK (60M) has a larger influence/sway on trade disputes than the EU (440M) is well trodden.
Your questions don't undermine the points made effectively by Mike.
I suspect there will be backtracking on the tariffs as they are so outrageous - but who knows what Trump will do - that Ford factory in Mexico was soon toast.
Your don't actually give an answer for what the EU can do for the Bombardier workers in this case.
Your second answer doesn't answer my question, it discusses the trade dispute. That's not what I asked you.
So far you have failed to address both of my questions, maybe you can try again.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff