Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 2)

[crankedup]

Mrr T said:

crankedup said:

Let’s keep it real, you plagiarised a complete major paragraph, trying to play it down by saying it was ‘only a little sentence’ is a lie. You were caught out and many posters jumped on it. And the more you try to play it down now the more attention will be drawn to it once again.
It’s true I do get my numbers wrong sometimes, honest mistakes are honest mistakes.

Your last para’ is, as is usual for you, complete nonsense made up in your head. Its so wrong in every detail, he didn’t lose his job he chose to move on and took on training to expand and move up in his field of work. He is an electronics engineer in a major pharma’ Company now and has also gained his Electrical Inspection Certificate for good measure.
It was certainly the undercutting of his wage rates by Eastern European immigrants that prompted him into the actions that he took. As it transpired he is now far better off in all aspects of his professional life. Most of the Eastern European’s now seem to have returned home leaving a shortage of trades people.

It may have been 2 sentences but does it matter? This is a car forum its not an essay for an examination.

As for the change in the story about your son. You repeated the claim many times. I remember because it was almost always followed by someone in the industry disagreeing.

It was a paragraph which was detailed in the debate being discussed at the time on the forum, you passed it off as your own. Yes it does matter, passing off others work as your own is about as low as it gets, wherever it’s used. Then to argue it’s OK to plagiagerise, well that tells me much about your ethics and morals tbh.
As to my lad, just recall what you are saying, not others opinions. Yes I have stated many times when I felt it appropriate, and several times a general question was posed ‘how has the EU affected you personally’ I then respond. I would suggest most level headed people would agree that is reasonable. If you or others chose to disagree, disbelieve then that’s up to you and them.
Somebody in the industry disagree’s with what I said, in life that will always be the case, somebody somewhere happens to disagree, wowsers!!!

[chrispmartha]

paulrockliffe said:

It always makes me laugh when the remainers try to make out that VAT isn't an EU thing. When I trained as a VAT compliance officer the first thing we did was look at the EU VAT Directive.

I'd expect that if we'd not joined the EU there would be a similar tax, but we wouldn't have had the legal approach where EU Law has direct effect in UK Law, but we must then write UK Law to match a legal system that cannot be translated directly.

The costs for both companies and Government in dealing with ECJ rulings and the inherent lack of legal certainty is massive just in VAT, let alone all the other areas where EU Law had direct effect. It's inherent in that setup, before you get to the ECJ subtly moving the goalposts over time.

VAT was introduced in 1973 wasn’t it?

[slow_poke]

Fittster said:

Brexit brings pain for UK vintage watch dealers


https://www.ft.com/content/b0bf47ab-e8b8-4f95-983d...

Ahhhhhh boo hoo. I have trouble finding any sympathy for them. Let them pass on the increase to their customers. It's not likely to be the working class Joe Grassroots that are his customers anyway. This one will only hit wearers of second hand Rolexes and they can cough up a bit more to support Brexit.

[crankedup]

I choose to offer a couple of links so that posters may, if they wish, Read for themselves the extent
of Germany’s use of coal (lignite) for their use in industrial power requirements. They have recently OPENED (2020) their last coal burning power plant. Germany are stating that they will close all 38
coal burning power plants by 2038. Why are they permitted by the EC to continue burning lignite, I see it as unfair competition with their use of cheap energy production.

powermag.com
bbc.co.u.k.>news>world-europe-51133534

I’m not posting numbers as I always seem to get them wrong, if your interested you can make up your own minds.

[bitchstewie]

roger.mellie said:

There's a bit of bleating against the system going on on this thread without acknowledging that the system is not unchangeable. It suits the tory and labour parties for you to feel the way you do and for you to think that voting has to be a binary decision.

It doesn't but why would they want it any other way if the sheep are prepared to follow? (not calling you a sheep before you get wound up, you're questioning the problem, most don't).

I actually agree with you but short of everyone going out to vote for an independent what can realistically be done?

Where I live a donkey in a blue rosette would be our MP and very little will change that.

I know because I voted for the donkey until the last election when I voted for an independent.

[Vanden Saab]

chrispmartha said:

paulrockliffe said:

It always makes me laugh when the remainers try to make out that VAT isn't an EU thing. When I trained as a VAT compliance officer the first thing we did was look at the EU VAT Directive.

I'd expect that if we'd not joined the EU there would be a similar tax, but we wouldn't have had the legal approach where EU Law has direct effect in UK Law, but we must then write UK Law to match a legal system that cannot be translated directly.

The costs for both companies and Government in dealing with ECJ rulings and the inherent lack of legal certainty is massive just in VAT, let alone all the other areas where EU Law had direct effect. It's inherent in that setup, before you get to the ECJ subtly moving the goalposts over time.

VAT was introduced in 1973 wasn’t it?

Yes... Why do you ask?

[crankedup]

blueg33 said:

Murph7355 said:

Fittster said:

Brexit brings pain for UK vintage watch dealers...

First brie and French wines, then skiing equipment, now vintage watches....

How will we cope

The point is that its "chip, chip, chip" damaging many sectors across the economy. Each of those sectors has employees and generates tax revenue and GDP.

Yes we can cope if its just one tiny sector, but it isn't one tiny sector- smart arse comments just demonstrate a lack of understanding and a failure to see the big economic picture and understand the importance of being able to trade freely with the largest single market on the planet that is conveniently right on our doorstep

It’s certainly chipping away atm and the effect upon those business owners has to be galling to say the least, both sides of the river. It was always going to be problematic and likely will continue to be so for months to come as these business affected become public knowledge.
I’m looking forward to learning of businesses taking advantage of new trade partners and trust that politicians can at the very least look to resolving or easing the trading problems with the EU.
Nobody can agree that it makes any sense that traders lose out due to the complexities of customs requirements between us.

[crankedup]

jimKRFC said:

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

DeepEnd said:

Mortarboard said:

crankedup said:

Still waiting .

To can play that game aaaaalllll day Cranked.

Evidence to the contrary please.

Still waiting.

M.

Do you think the evidence of immigration not materially affecting wages has led to the rethink over swarming invaders?

But that was only half the story in that report, and I said that the definitions of ‘lower paid’ and ‘higher paid’ were not included. what is ‘higher paid’ a CEO what is ‘lower paid’ a cabbage picker? That being undefined leaves the analysis meaningless.

Interesting its now meaningless because it doesn't fit with your narrative. What the report did state was the effect on wages was small, whether higher or lower paid, it also came to a few other conclusions that don't correlate with 'the immigrants are stealing our jobs' narrative.

Yay seemed chuffed when TB brought he report up, now it's meaningless?

And remember it was TB who first introduced this report to try and help prove your point (which backfired)

It also says it doesn't conclude on the impact on the self employed, and as most electricans (as are plumbers etc..)are self employed, it doesn't support any comments on immigration impact on wages.

My lad was self employed electrician at the time.

[chrispmartha]

Vanden Saab said:

Yes... Why do you ask?

Then it’s not an EU thing is it, when was the EU formed?

[chrispmartha]

crankedup said:

My lad was self employed electrician at the time.

And hes gone on to do quite well for himself hasn’t he?

[Digga]

Vanden Saab said:

chrispmartha said:

paulrockliffe said:

It always makes me laugh when the remainers try to make out that VAT isn't an EU thing. When I trained as a VAT compliance officer the first thing we did was look at the EU VAT Directive.

I'd expect that if we'd not joined the EU there would be a similar tax, but we wouldn't have had the legal approach where EU Law has direct effect in UK Law, but we must then write UK Law to match a legal system that cannot be translated directly.

The costs for both companies and Government in dealing with ECJ rulings and the inherent lack of legal certainty is massive just in VAT, let alone all the other areas where EU Law had direct effect. It's inherent in that setup, before you get to the ECJ subtly moving the goalposts over time.

VAT was introduced in 1973 wasn’t it?

Yes... Why do you ask?

IMHO of all the taxes, VAT is generally pretty useful. Most economies have at least one similar sort of tax. In the USA, for example, you may have both national and local (state) taxes.

It is consumptive, so can be used to control spending and also to rapidly raise revenue if need be.

It also differentiates between private and business consumption, which tends to thereby minimise drag on investment or production and restricts the price inflatory effects merely to the former market.

[blueg33]

Digga said:

Vanden Saab said:

chrispmartha said:

paulrockliffe said:

It always makes me laugh when the remainers try to make out that VAT isn't an EU thing. When I trained as a VAT compliance officer the first thing we did was look at the EU VAT Directive.

I'd expect that if we'd not joined the EU there would be a similar tax, but we wouldn't have had the legal approach where EU Law has direct effect in UK Law, but we must then write UK Law to match a legal system that cannot be translated directly.

The costs for both companies and Government in dealing with ECJ rulings and the inherent lack of legal certainty is massive just in VAT, let alone all the other areas where EU Law had direct effect. It's inherent in that setup, before you get to the ECJ subtly moving the goalposts over time.

VAT was introduced in 1973 wasn’t it?

Yes... Why do you ask?

IMHO of all the taxes, VAT is generally pretty useful. Most economies have at least one similar sort of tax. In the USA, for example, you may have both national and local (state) taxes.

It is consumptive, so can be used to control spending and also to rapidly raise revenue if need be.

It also differentiates between private and business consumption, which tends to thereby minimise drag on investment or production and restricts the price inflatory effects merely to the former market.

As I said, we had it before VAT, called purchase tax and the rates were much higher than the 8% introduced when we entered the common market

[crankedup]

bhstewie said:

roger.mellie said:

There's a bit of bleating against the system going on on this thread without acknowledging that the system is not unchangeable. It suits the tory and labour parties for you to feel the way you do and for you to think that voting has to be a binary decision.

It doesn't but why would they want it any other way if the sheep are prepared to follow? (not calling you a sheep before you get wound up, you're questioning the problem, most don't).

I actually agree with you but short of everyone going out to vote for an independent what can realistically be done?

Where I live a donkey in a blue rosette would be our MP and very little will change that.

I know because I voted for the donkey until the last election when I voted for an independent.

It’s much the same in Bury st Edmunds, blue as blue gets which happens to be fine for me. The problem is for me that it’s not a competitive situation that engenders a political desire to improve, fighting for the electorates vote is represented by a single fold bit of paper posted through the letterbox. If strong independence MPs start winning we end up with a Government that is worse than a traditional but rare coalition Government?

[crankedup]

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

My lad was self employed electrician at the time.

And hes gone on to do quite well for himself hasn’t he?

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

[Mrr T]

Ean218 said:

I well remember the chaos caused by the introduction of VAT, intrastats, EU sales lists and cross border triangulation rules along with the accompanying paperwork. Most trading companies had to get brand new accounting software just to cope with it.

I was working in my father's accountancy firm at the time because I had to retake an A level. So remember the introduction of VAT.

I have highlighted one word in the post. Remember this is 1973 we are discussing. Does anything strike you as odd about the claim?

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

My lad was self employed electrician at the time.

And hes gone on to do quite well for himself hasn’t he?

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

So you’re saying freedom of movement was a good thing for him now?

[chrispmartha]

crankedup said:

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

So the competition he faced in his trade actually helped him and his career in the end.

[anonymous-user]

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

So the competition he faced in his trade actually helped him and his career in the end.

His argument makes no sense.

FOM was good for his son but he voted for brexit to stop foreigners forcing other people to adapt and get better qualifications and do the same as his son.

[chrispmartha]

El stovey said:

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

So the competition he faced in his trade actually helped him and his career in the end.

His argument makes no sense.

FOM was good for his son but he voted for brexit to stop foreigners forcing other people to adapt and get better qualifications and do the same as his son.

It also makes no sense because if his sons ambition was to employ people and FOM meant lower wages for employees then it would have helped him to run his business because rhe wage bill would have been lower

[crankedup]

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

Yup, as I have said several times, he was given a ‘boot up his backside’ metaphorically speaking, by the situation he faced some 10 years ago or so. His ambition was to go from self employment
to forming his own business and then of course expand employing more people. He decided to take his alternative route, which as it turns out was a good decision.

So the competition he faced in his trade actually helped him and his career in the end.

Yes,, the argument has always been about the so called ‘level
playing field’ some say that the FOM created a capping of wages in certain industries others disagree. My lad has the wherewithal to be able to take advantage of his then situation, although he could have chosen to gruel it out and go from self employment to setting up his own Company and start employing people, maybe those self same immigrants. As it transpired he has made his choice work well for himself. Many of the immigrant workers have now left the U.K. to work elsewhere presumably.