EU referendum

EU referendum

  • In

    Votes: 503 47.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 547 52.1%
  • Total voters
    1,050
Status
Not open for further replies.
jimbopm said:
It's amusing to see attempts to support migration dismissed as 'leftish tosh' when one of the founding principles of free-market economics states that people will be drawn to where the jobs/opportunities are.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree free migration is inherently capitalist and the free movement of labour is one of the key cornerstones of capitalism. It is quite humorous to see liberal people supporting liberal free market policies labeled leftist by people who want to crack down state control, close the borders and act in very Warsaw Pact manner. People who think they are free market and capitalist but actually don't believe in anything that they preach.
 
EalingBlue2 said:
I would agree on the deficit but would also agree that much of the austerity is needless as it could be dealt with by tax and spending
Click to expand...

You've either worded that sloppily, or you are terribly confused.

The deficit is the gap between the states' income from tax revenue and what it spends. You reduce that gap by increasing tax and/or reducing spending. Reducing spending is what we call "austerity".

Are you suggesting we should stop "reducing spending" and simply narrow the gap through much higher taxation? How much more would you like contribute? Voluntary donations are welcome.
 
whp.blue said:
I think you are being slightly disingenuous using those figures
12% of one Economy is a whole lot less than 7% of 20 plus economies I would like you to quote in pounds or Euros what those % actually mean in real terms
Click to expand...

They are not my figures, and you miss the point, which is about relative importance. It's 12% important to us and 7% important to them. If we lost all our European trade altogether, we'd be 12% down. They'd be 7% down. There's nothing disingenuous about that. In terms of %age of exports, we'd be 45% down and they would be 7% down.

As I have posted previously, what is misleading and disingenuous is to pretend that the EU (calling it a single body, when in fact it is a bunch of loosely aligned sovereign states), needs us more than we need them and therefore we hold the upper hand in any trade negotiations.

That very simplistic and erroneous claim, completely ignore the fact the the EU's trade with us is comprised of that of 27 nations. Our trade with them comprises of 1 nation, i.e. us.

If we fail to reach a satisfactory trade agreement, on the one side there is us who are massively impacted. Whereas on the other side there are 27 nations who are only marginally impacted. Their "pain" would be shared amongst 27 states whereas our pain would be shared with no-one. If we fail to reach agreement, how much do you think Latvia and Estonia will be inconvenienced? Yet we need their support in order to reach agreement.

This is a terrible basis for favourable negotiation.
 
Last edited:
Chippy_boy said:
"Needless austerity"? There's some sense in what you say but continually spending £180bn more than we earn every year is not a good idea.
Click to expand...

Why's that? You have a mortgage? The government is keen for students to run up debt on the undestanding they'll pay it some way down the road, so why not the rest of us?

Money is cheap, never been a better time to borrow and if we can get the rich fuckers to pay their share then jobs a goodun.

The sun will rise tomorrow, never you fear.
 
The perfect fumble said:
Why's that? You have a mortgage? The government is keen for students to run up debt on the undestanding they'll pay it some way down the road, so why not the rest of us?

Money is cheap, never been a better time to borrow and if we can get the rich fuckers to pay their share then jobs a goodun.

The sun will rise tomorrow, never you fear.
Click to expand...

Good idea. Oh wait, we are already £4,000 billion overdrawn and rising (literally, when you include pension liabilities). What's your next suggestion?
 
Chippy_boy said:
You've either worded that sloppily, or you are terribly confused.

The deficit is the gap between the states' income from tax revenue and what it spends. You reduce that gap by increasing tax and/or reducing spending. Reducing spending is what we call "austerity".

Are you suggesting we should stop "reducing spending" and simply narrow the gap through much higher taxation? How much more would you like contribute? Voluntary donations are welcome.
Click to expand...
Terribly worded as are most of my streams of un punctuated prose.

My point is we cannot keep increasing the debt but the austerity we speak of is not targeted in the best way and is at the expense often of the weakest in society. I would have high earners taxed more, the wealthy taxes more on their investments , I would actually tax business less though. I would also change spending priorities and target it differently .

So I would re - prioritise spending and would raise more through tax but try to avoid taxes that directly effect investment or rather are more elastic in terms of effecting outcomes.

I also took a political take on austerity so used it in terms of the politics angle rather than a literal term of reducing spend.

Personally I pay a lot of tax and don't complain about it, I would like the rate to be a little higher if spent wisely but would never donate voluntarily to the government as it would be pissing in the wind and as is seen in America the more people donate the less responsibility governments want to take, so I would be virtually putting money in Aussie Urmstons pocket
 
Last edited:
Chippy_boy said:
Good idea. Oh wait, we are already £4,000 billion overdrawn and rising (literally, when you include pension liabilities). What's your next suggestion?
Click to expand...
I am Glad someone else mentions this we are pissing about with Brexit votes and putting off discussing the real issues rather than having a national discussion on having a fiscally safe future and agreeing as a nation what we want to maintain and how we will pay for it
 
Chippy_boy said:
They are not my figures, and you miss the point, which is about relative importance. It's 12% important to us and 7% important to them. If we lost all our European trade altogether, we'd be 12% down. They'd be 7% down. There's nothing disingenuous about that. In terms of %age of exports, we'd be 45% down and they would be 7% down.

As I have posted previously, what is misleading and disingenuous is to pretend that the EU (calling it a single body, when in fact it is a bunch of loosely aligned sovereign states), needs us more than we need them and therefore we hold the upper hand in any trade negotiations.

That very simplistic and erroneous claim, completely ignore the fact the the EU's trade with us is comprised of that of 27 nations. Our trade with them comprises of 1 nation, i.e. us.

If we fail to reach a satisfactory trade agreement, on the one side there is us who are massively impacted. Whereas on the other side there are 27 nations who are only marginally impacted. Their "pain" would be shared amongst 27 states whereas our pain would be shared with no-one. If we fail to reach agreement, how much do you think Latvia and Estonia will be inconvenienced? Yet we need their support in order to reach agreement.

This is a terrible basis for favourable negotiation.
Click to expand...
Don't mess with the fantasy we are GREAT Britain we rule the waves we built an empire without Europe and they will bow to our every whim
 
Chippy_boy said:
Good idea. Oh wait, we are already £4,000 billion overdrawn and rising (literally, when you include pension liabilities). What's your next suggestion?
Click to expand...

For you to calm down.

We've run a deficit on our account since Elizabeth I. The deficit as it presently stands is high by historical standards but that is a direct result of the crash in 2008. Prior to that it was around the norm for peace time 20th Century.

Since George has squeezed the economy things have got worse and as he continues to squeeze they will get worse still.

This is apparent to anyone not blinded by dogma, the evidence is everywhere, it staggers me that there are those who cannot see.
 
EalingBlue2 said:
Morally bankrupt love it! We need to vote out to save our very souls. There is no political view on Japan it is simple statistics , simple reality. It's not fictional go and spend some time reading on it, maybe even go there and see the reality.
Click to expand...

YES we do need to vote to leave to preserve our souls and are democracy! Look Japan will innovate itself out of any economic mess their some of the brightest people on the planet! They are no mugs!! Are you really telling me one of the most successful countries on the planet with one of the strongest currencies on planet earth is going to collapse because they won't accept mass immigration!
 
The perfect fumble said:
For you to calm down.

We've run a deficit on our account since Elizabeth I. The deficit as it presently stands is high by historical standards but that is a direct result of the crash in 2008. Prior to that it was around the norm for peace time 20th Century.

Since George has squeezed the economy things have got worse and as he continues to squeeze they will get worse still.

This is apparent to anyone not blinded by dogma, the evidence is everywhere, it staggers me that there are those who cannot see.
Click to expand...
There are two things at play here, one is the cyclica deficit you are talking about which needs to swing between good times and bad and can be used to lee the economy going .

The trouble is lost of the western world also has a long term structural deficit, mainly driven by two factors. Healthcare getting increasingly sophisticated , increasingly expensive and people living longer and secondly because our system and our expectations are based on people working 18-65 and dying about 75 and more and more people are starting work later, wanting to finish earlier and living decades longer. This is now a Ponzi scheme and most western countries have structural deficits that will be over 10% per annum within a decade. That has to be addressed or everyone will end up like Japan and the 2008 crisis will look like a lost shilling

So you are both right in some ways but something does have to be done and people are going to have to lower expectations , think long term, be much less selfish and much more realistic because it is not a can we can keep kicking down the road.

The RU vote is a typical politicians distraction to take eyes away from the real issues and to try and find someone else to blame when reality hits.
 
wilmslowblue said:
YES we do need to vote to leave to preserve our souls and are democracy! Look Japan will innovate itself out of any economic mess their some of the brightest people on the planet! They are no mugs!! Are you really telling me one of the most successful countries on the planet with one of the strongest currencies on planet earth is going to collapse because they won't accept mass immigration!
Click to expand...
No country can survive a 200% plus deficit, negative interest rates, an ageing population, a declining birth rate etc without mass immigration. They are also not today a fountain of innovation either sadly many of the main Japanese companies are being smashed by Korea, China etc. The only thing that has kept Japan solvent is that their companies rarely avoid tax in Japan so do repatriate more than nearly any other country benefits from .still it is crippled it can't grow its economy and I am not sure what Japan you are talking about but few in Asia would recognise it

As for Their super strong currency in the last few years has lost nearly half its value against the USD at a time of near zero rates in the US and a similar amount against the Yuan which the Chinese actively manage to keep low - it's a basket case in Australia we are very worried about public debt to GDP being 29% in Japan it is now more than 229%.
 
Last edited:
The perfect fumble said:
For you to calm down.

We've run a deficit on our account since Elizabeth I. The deficit as it presently stands is high by historical standards but that is a direct result of the crash in 2008. Prior to that it was around the norm for peace time 20th Century.

Since George has squeezed the economy things have got worse and as he continues to squeeze they will get worse still.

This is apparent to anyone not blinded by dogma, the evidence is everywhere, it staggers me that there are those who cannot see.
Click to expand...

It staggers me that you should think that spending money we haven't got, in order to make us get better, could in any way seem like a good idea. It's a absolutely cretinous idea.
 
Chippy_boy said:
It staggers me that you should think that spending money we haven't got, in order to make us get better, could in any way seem like a good idea. It's a absolutely cretinous idea.
Click to expand...
To be fair he might be suggesting investing money to create more or save more which in cyclical terms can work is a good idea. Which is not strictly the same thing and without structural deficit could work
 
EalingBlue2 said:
As for Their super strong currency in the last few years has lost nearly half its value against the USD at a time of near zero rates in the US and a similar amount against the Yuan which the Chinese actively manage to keep low - it's a basket case in Australia we are very worried about public debt to GDP being 29% in Japan it is now more than 229%.
Click to expand...

In the UK, it's about 312% when you factor in pension liabilities.

But never mind, let's borrow more eh, perfectfumble?
 
Chippy_boy said:
Yes, god knows. I have no idea what their public sector pension liabilities look like. But you might find the following interesting, which estimates the UK's debt to be nearer £8 trillion than the £1.6 trillion often quoted:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n.../1434447400/Real_National_Debt.pdf?1434447400
Click to expand...
I will read it and don't disagree with the problem however I suspect my view of the solution will be polar opposite from what I have read about and from them in the past. They are the group who live Ted Cruz style economics aren't they - guess I will find out
 
Chippy_boy said:
It staggers me that you should think that spending money we haven't got, in order to make us get better, could in any way seem like a good idea. It's a absolutely cretinous idea.
Click to expand...

Really? The City of London, John Maynard Keynes and the entire banking world, not to mention anyone who has a mortgage, car loan, student loan, or any debt for that matter bow before your superior knowledge.

The whole bloody world runs on tick, even though George lost our Triple A rating we can borrow at phenomenally low rates. The issue is not debt, it is our ability to service it, the only way to service debt is to grow the economy, the economy is not growing fast enough, solution? Grow the economy! So what does George do? He squeezes the economy, so he misses target after target after target as the economy is not growing fast enough, so he squeezes it some more waiting for some neo liberal fucking miracle to save it.

He'll be waiting a long time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top