How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[Nickgnome]

jsf said:

What makes you think UK government couldn't legislate limits to working time in jobs that require them for safety reasons?

Because the attraction of revenue will swing in favour of relaxing regulation. It will be stated that individuals should be responsible for their own safety. Which of course is very true but work pressures may dictate otherwise.

[PurpleMoonlight]

JagLover said:

Bit of a worrying article in today's Telegraph.

Looks like the Eurozone is definitely heading into recession.

Industrial production down 2.6% in Italy year on year, 2.6% in Spain, 1.3% in France and 1.9% in Germany.

This is worth quoting

"The Euro remains a relentlessly deflationary currency that has ripped demand out of whole economies. With weakened banking systems, towering imbalances between core and periphery, puny wage growth, relentless austerity and mass unemployment"

This is the economic edifice that Remainers wish to see us remain tightly bound for "economic" reasons. This is the project that centre-left politicians support as a "left wing" cause.

Oh, look ...

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/indust...

[anonymous-user]

JagLover said:

Bit of a worrying article in today's Telegraph.

Looks like the Eurozone is definitely heading into recession.

Industrial production down 2.6% in Italy year on year, 2.6% in Spain, 1.3% in France and 1.9% in Germany.

This is worth quoting

"The Euro remains a relentlessly deflationary currency that has ripped demand out of whole economies. With weakened banking systems, towering imbalances between core and periphery, puny wage growth, relentless austerity and mass unemployment"

This is the economic edifice that Remainers wish to see us remain tightly bound for "economic" reasons. This is the project that centre-left politicians support as a "left wing" cause.

It’s a good job remain is the only one peddling ‘project fear’ heh?

[Sway]

toppstuff said:

Absolutely not. Maybe eloquence is escaping me here , but on this point I think we are actually in agreement.

I detected a tone in the thread that did not regard "difference" in the same and quite correct way you summarise it. Maybe I was wrong, I don't know.

Of course there is an element that hold the views you describe. I think I see it far less often than I see it "called out". There's likely a middle ground between my observance of the trait and that of someone on the opposite side of the European integration debate that's the real prevalence of it.

[Nickgnome]

Sway said:

Nickgnome said:

Because the track record of our governments has shown them to. Be very poor at regional investment.

Personally i quite like the idea that school bus drivers, lorry drivers, pilots etc are limited to the number of hours they should work. Policing of course is another matter.

It's not the WTD restricting the working hours of the occupations you've listed...

There is now significant and growing evidence that people that work more than 50 hours are more error prone whilst working, the error rate increases drastically as the hours increase. Furthermore ther are impacts to long term health if more hours are worked regularly. Night shift working exacerbates this.

We should have sustainable business, based on sensible work patterns.

[Mrr T]

Dr Jekyll said:

Mrr T said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Mrr T said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Far longer history of democracy and free speech.
Historic suspicion of centralised power with a concept that the government ultimately answers to us to us to them.
A culture of 'anything not forbidden is permitted' while mainland Europe tends towards the reverse.

Do you live in the UK?

I do and the UK is one of the least democratic countries in Europe.

You can now go to jail for singing football songs.

The government is totally centralized except for limited power in Scotland and very limited power in Wales.

We have a political elite which is self replicating and totally divorced from the real world.

Everything is banned or regulated or taxed and we have a nanny in government telling us what we must not do.

Most of which has come about while we are in the EU.

So have mobile phones and tablets?

In fact most of these short coming long predate the EU and none are caused by by the EU.

I didn't say they were caused by the EU, just that they were irrelevant to the question. If they had all predated the EU but gone away due to our enlightened leaders in Brussels the Remainers might have a point.

You listed reasons you seem to feel separate the UK from the rest of Europe. I pointed out all your reasons where wrong.

Now it seems it's the fault of the EU for not solving the UK democratic deficiency.

Leaver have strange logic.

[Sway]

Nickgnome said:

Sway said:

Nickgnome said:

Because the track record of our governments has shown them to. Be very poor at regional investment.

Personally i quite like the idea that school bus drivers, lorry drivers, pilots etc are limited to the number of hours they should work. Policing of course is another matter.

It's not the WTD restricting the working hours of the occupations you've listed...

There is now significant and growing evidence that people that work more than 50 hours are more error prone whilst working, the error rate increases drastically as the hours increase. Furthermore ther are impacts to long term health if more hours are worked regularly. Night shift working exacerbates this.

We should have sustainable business, based on sensible work patterns.

I don't disagree.

The fact is though, that the Working Time Directive is irrelevant in the context of "school bus drivers, lorry drivers, pilots". It is not the WTD that restricts their hours.

[Robertj21a]

Nickgnome said:

Robertj21a said:

chrispmartha said:

Can you list the number of ways ‘we’ (not sure why you speak for everyone) are ‘different, than ‘them’?

I suggest that you read the earlier posts.

But you never answered did you?

If i missed it please point me to that date and time please as you’ve ducked my questions to you.

All very amusing. I'm surprised that you (and the current 'gang' now trailing along.....) haven't understood my original post last night. If you care to re-read what I actually said (before all the other 'frothers' decided to deliberately misinterpret everything), you will see that I put forward a number of 'Perhaps'.........I also said 'I don't know what it is'.

If you feel that the UK as a whole blends in with the EU then fine, we all have our own opinions on the matter. Just don't assume that your view of this glorious Euro-land, with 27 brothers, all working in happy union, will suit all of us.

.

[FiF]

Following on from all the recent discussions around what to do if the vote goes against the Govt on Tuesday. Incidentally BBC claiming she will lose by 200+ votes, finding more converts to reject than to support. I digress.

Any comments about the claims in the Express, (sorry), that the EU Ambassador to the US has said or maybe rumoured that in the event of the deal being rejected that any Art50 extension will be very limited in time. EU wishing to be done before May, i.e. in the EU parliament elections there will be no British participation.

If this is so that then excludes the possibility of another referendum surely. Insufficient time.

Maybe this is a strategy to focus minds in Whitehall on the two options on the table, WA or no deal, and eliminate time wasting speculation on alterative lines such as discussed on here and elsewhere end of last week.

But if that scotches another referendum that's a major blow to Remainers, maybe an attempt to get sufficient of them behind the WA?

[NoNeed]

Nickgnome said:

NoNeed said:

John145 said:

NoNeed said:

remember how bad they said it would be?

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/2016081...


Makes mays deal look good

One would think that once the economic argument had been well and truly lost new arguments about remainer idealism would come about but alas... no.

It would be nice if they abandoned the scaremongering and actually listed some facts on why the EU is good

In my opinion the Eu has been good for the UK

FoM has enabled significant growth which would have been constrained by lack of resource otherwise.

Ability to trade within the Eu unemcumbered.

Standardisation across a wide range of products and components.

Health and Safety and working time directive.

Grants to areas of the UK which would not be have been received otherwise. Remember it is those areas that submit the request and then manage the project once granted.

Collegiate projects and research.

Edited by Nickgnome on Saturday 12th January 11:49

none of which require a political union

[toppstuff]

NoNeed said:

one of which require a political union

Given the reality of FOM, the integration of university research under EU structures, just as two examples, it is easy to prove your statement wrong.

[crankedup]

Dr Jekyll said:

Nickgnome said:

Robertj21a said:

I realise that you are merely attempting to argue some silly point of detail, but my meaning was simply that this country (and the people within it) is quite different from all/most of the others in the EU.


.

That’s the bit i do not get. In what way are we different, other than the various languages?

Far longer history of democracy and free speech.
Historic suspicion of centralised power with a concept that the government ultimately answers to us to us to them.
A culture of 'anything not forbidden is permitted' while mainland Europe tends towards the reverse.

Good points + we in the U.K. do not allow pet dogs to poop over pavements nor do we allow dogs in eating houses, unlike France for example

[NoNeed]

toppstuff said:

NoNeed said:

one of which require a political union

Given the reality of FOM, the integration of university research under EU structures, just as two examples, it is easy to prove your statement wrong.

Nah none of those require political union

[Tuna]

toppstuff said:

NoNeed said:

one of which require a political union

Given the reality of FOM, the integration of university research under EU structures, just as two examples, it is easy to prove your statement wrong.

Please do, because your logic escapes me. How do either of your two examples actually require political union?

We can commit funds, people to various common goals (worldwide) and do so - everything from putting Tim Peak in space to Relief aid in Africa. Those require extensive co-operation, sharing of funds, global travel, agreed standards and regulations - but not political union.

[crankedup]

Elysium said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Robertj21a said:

Fine, I quite understand that some will have different views - that's the point of a discussion forum.

Maybe the EU27 have found a way to retain their national identity and still work together for the greater good.

Perhaps they acknowledge that their national interest does not have to come first in every situation.

It seems to me that France has no difficulty in maintaining it's national identity whilst remaining in the EU? I can't imagine them being less 'French' as a result of the EU's 'ever closer union'.

Simple reason being that France is a kingpin, along with Germany, of the EU project. Also France tends to ignore much of the EU regularity stuff when it comes down to licensing, example electrical and plumbing, food sales.

[bitchstewie]

ash73 said:

If they're going to cancel it they should just cancel it, I don't think there'll be another referendum.

The logical thing for Labour to do is to table a no confidence vote after the deal is rejected, force a general election and pledge to withdraw article 50 if they are elected. It's what most of their voters want and they'll steal quite a few Tory remainer votes into the bargain. The problem is Corbyn is a closet leaver and won't play ball.

Any delay would be unbearable, people have had enough and too many domestic issues are being sidelined.

Labour won't offer that.

I don't believe it's anything to do with "Will of the people" I think it's as simple as "Will of the Trade Unions" which is why Corbyn has just as many issues in his own party and electorate as the old union/socialist types want out whilst at the same time he has the slight inconvenience of all the youngsters who worship "Jeremy" who mostly want in.

[crankedup]

toppstuff said:

bhstewie said:

Odd how so many people focus on how we're "different to them" rather than perhaps focussing on how we're the same.

This. 100%.

Seeing people say "we are different to them" is incredibly depressing for my kids and our future.

It is also total and utter rubbish.

Spend time with Europeans ( and TALK to them ) and we have much more in common than we have apart.

God this site is so depressing sometimes. I read comments like this and it's hard to think we are not sewing the seeds of our own destruction.

"We are different to them". Good grief.

Go to a international football match. If we are all the same, which is pure drivel, you may notice just how different people from different Nationalities react.

[crankedup]

toppstuff said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Most of which has come about while we are in the EU.

haha... that really is ridiculous.

The UK is the nanny state of Europe. Our own rules are more draconian than those in the EU when it comes to CCTV and privacy.

Brexit will, if anything, further accelerate our move toward a nanny state because that is the instinctive mood of our own Government, IMO.

Are you saying that CCTV and privacy laws are bad? If so why?

[Tuna]

Sway said:

toppstuff said:

Absolutely not. Maybe eloquence is escaping me here , but on this point I think we are actually in agreement.

I detected a tone in the thread that did not regard "difference" in the same and quite correct way you summarise it. Maybe I was wrong, I don't know.

Of course there is an element that hold the views you describe. I think I see it far less often than I see it "called out". There's likely a middle ground between my observance of the trait and that of someone on the opposite side of the European integration debate that's the real prevalence of it.

There is a temptation to interpret the more nuanced posts in the light of the extreme nonsense that surrounds them - but that's not really an excuse if you've been posting on the thread for any length of time. It's fairly clear that there are relatively few "frothing at the mouth, send them all home" Leavers posting here, and relatively few "Junker is my hero, we should all speak Esperanto" Remainers.

However, both toppstuff and MrGnome in particular do both have a habit of taking neutral comments on the current situation and interpreting them as attacks on Europe. Right now, there's no direct political route to Remaining, so inevitably the conversation will often revolve around preferred ways to leave. Preferring one flavour of deal to another does not require that we have to go through yet another loop of "But the EU is lovely, why would anyone want to leave?".

I can understand that some posters will feel like they're an embattled minority (after all there's only toppstuff, MrGnome, Helocopter, Ghibli, frisbee, Mr T, Trolleys Thank You, chrispmartha, Crackie, bhstewie, Elysium, Derek Smith, Piha, saaby93 and a bunch of other regular posters arguing against Leave) - but assuming everyone on here is just frothing with excitement at the prospect of Leaving ends in a lot of pointless arguments.

[frisbee]

crankedup said:

Are you saying that CCTV and privacy laws are bad? If so why?

Are you saying that taking back control is bad? Hmmm.