The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (218 Viewers)

[martcov]

I believe he actually comes from a rather middle class village in Leicestershire.

A fxxking foreigner you mean? The clue is in the name I suppose.

 

---

[clint van damme]

Some Tories now talking about paying the EU to allow us a 'managed transition period' to leave with no deal as we are so under prepared for it, what a mess!!

 

[martcov]

Some Tories now talking about paying the EU to allow us a 'managed transition period' to leave with no deal as we are so under prepared for it, what a mess!!

Managed transition is just another name for extending article 50. sounds better to hard core leavers. Was always on the cards.

 

[skybluetony176]

She signed the Single European Act in 1986 which created the Single Market and thus all the regulations that came with it.

Shhhh.

 

[skybluetony176]

Single European Act that Maggie signed, forerunner to Maastricht

The resultant treaty aimed to create a "Single Market" in the Community by 1992, and as a means of achieving this adopted a more collaborative legislative process, later known as the cooperation procedure, which gave the European Parliament a real say in legislating for the first time and introduced more majority voting in the Council of Ministers.[1] Under the procedure the Council could, with the support of Parliament and acting on a proposal by the Commission, adopt a legislative proposal by a qualified majority, but the Council could also overrule a rejection of a proposed law by the Parliament by adopting a proposal unanimously.[2]

You and your pro EU rubbish.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Some Tories now talking about paying the EU to allow us a 'managed transition period' to leave with no deal as we are so under prepared for it, what a mess!!

Second referendum.

 

[clint van damme]

like giving employees a share of profit, giving normal staff members a voice on the board and scaling wages inline with company profits or targets.

I worked for a large Canadian/American corporation that did this, (used to get an annual award in 70% shares and 30% cash), though you couldn't sell the shares for 5 years and there were penalties when you left.

Was a really good idea and Corbyn has suggested making it law for all firms employing over 250 people though I'm not sure you should be able to force companies to do it nor if it's viable for companies that small but it is something worth looking into.
It also used to annually review wages in line with competitors and and we had a couple of really big rises on the back of these reviews.

This is a huge corporation that turned over 38 billion dollars in 2017 so it's not some tree hugging cooperative and these ideas worked really well.

 

[skybluetony176]

I worked for a company for many years that did a profit share bonus scheme. It was only ever productive as everyone had a vested interest in doing their very best in their job. The bonus wasn’t based on rank either it was at the bosses discretion. So essentially a store man could have been taking a bigger bonus than someone in middle management if the boss thought he added more value to the business. It happened too, I remember one middle manager who resigned after learning that the van driver got a bigger bonus than him. He was a cock though and the driver was like having an extra sales representative as he would always ask if they needed anything dropping out later and come back from his morning run clutching orders, customers loved him and he didn’t have any ambition to be anything other than the driver but he understood that if he did something as simple as asking if there’s anything else you need then it would reflect in his annual bonus.

Profit share is a good idea in my experience.

 

[Nick]

I worked for a company for many years did a profit share bonus scheme. It was only ever productive as everyone had a vested interest in doing their very best in their job. The bonus wasn’t based on rank either it was at the bosses discretion. So essentially a store man could have been taking a bigger bonus than someone in middle management if the manager thought he added more value to the business. It happened too, I remember one middle manager who resigned after learning that the van driver got a bigger bonus than him. He was a cock though and the driver was like having an extra sales representative as he would always ask if they needed anything dropping out later and come back from his morning run clutching orders, customers loved him and he didn’t have any ambition to be anything other than the driver but he understood that if he did something as simple as asking if there’s anything else you need then it would reflect in his annual bonus.

Profit share is a good idea in my experience.

Would much rather people like that get bonuses than the twats at the top who end up taking millions from failed banks etc.

 

[shmmeee]

First post in here so treat me gently - ITS A FUCKIN APPALLING DEAL - you can see the smiles on Juncker and Barnier whose salary we are financing - whatever they are happy with stinks for UK - so we tell them to fuck off - Maggie would have pulled the drawbar up and said you come here to negotiate

Maggie would’ve cancelled Brexit. Let’s be honest, she was an old school Conservative who cafes about the economy and trade.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Reconciliation: Role of British Foreign, Defence and International Development Policy - Hansard

Just found out this was what they discussed in the House of Lords once the vote was pulled. Lots for coventrians to be proud of

 

[martcov]

Reconciliation: Role of British Foreign, Defence and International Development Policy - Hansard

Just found out this was what they discussed in the House of Lords once the vote was pulled. Lots for coventrians to be proud of

I cannot read all that.... can you precy it? With Coventry relevance.... please.

 

[Astute]

If you agree to the terms of trade, you are letting someone trade with yourself by allowing him some access to your country in return for some access to his country. That is a loss of some control of your country. If you are a member NATO or the UN, or if you have signed the Genera Convention you have also given up some sovereignty. You are trading some of your sovereignty for the benefits of being in a multilateral organisation. It is normal.

We didn't join up to the EU and all the rules, regulations and laws that cane with it. We joined up with the common market.

So what hasn't changed to what we joined up to and what it has become now?

 

[Astute]

I like it when you balance opinions. I think no deal will be disastrous for business

Very good chance you are right. But it would give us 12 months from leaving to sort a trade deal out. And I would guess it would include paying for the privilege.

 

[Astute]

She signed the Single European Act in 1986 which created the Single Market and thus all the regulations that came with it.

But what regulations did Maggie sign up to which are in place now and then make a list of all those that have come in since.

 

[Astute]

Single European Act that Maggie signed, forerunner to Maastricht

The resultant treaty aimed to create a "Single Market" in the Community by 1992, and as a means of achieving this adopted a more collaborative legislative process, later known as the cooperation procedure, which gave the European Parliament a real say in legislating for the first time and introduced more majority voting in the Council of Ministers.[1] Under the procedure the Council could, with the support of Parliament and acting on a proposal by the Commission, adopt a legislative proposal by a qualified majority, but the Council could also overrule a rejection of a proposed law by the Parliament by adopting a proposal unanimously.[2]

And there you have my point.

Some on here are trying to say that we would have had the same in every way if we still had Maggie or someone as strong as her in charge.

 

[Astute]

Some Tories now talking about paying the EU to allow us a 'managed transition period' to leave with no deal as we are so under prepared for it, what a mess!!

I have been saying for a couple of years that I can see us paying for the privilege. Look at the countries with EU deals that are not in the EU. They pay for the privilege.

What makes you think we would have it any differently?

 

[Astute]

I worked for a large Canadian/American corporation that did this, (used to get an annual award in 70% shares and 30% cash), though you couldn't sell the shares for 5 years and there were penalties when you left.

Was a really good idea and Corbyn has suggested making it law for all firms employing over 250 people though I'm not sure you should be able to force companies to do it nor if it's viable for companies that small but it is something worth looking into.
It also used to annually review wages in line with competitors and and we had a couple of really big rises on the back of these reviews.

This is a huge corporation that turned over 38 billion dollars in 2017 so it's not some tree hugging cooperative and these ideas worked really well.

It is the same as the company I work for. It is a large American company. For pay awards we look at the top 10% paid and aim to be in that percentile. We have a share scheme. We receive a bonus and also private healthcare.

It is as much as to try and keep the skills of the workforce as much as anything. But it is slowly changing. The big shareholders don't like us getting our slice of the cake. They always want more. Yet it it us that makes the company a success. I am glad that I am coming towards the end of my working career as shareholders are becoming more important than the workforce. I aim to retire in 8 years 11 months when my youngest is 18. But those joining now won't be able to as easily. Even my final salary pension scheme ends at the end of this month. All down to Gordon Brown and the shareholders. I feel sorry for those joining the workforce now.

 

[Astute]

Maggie would’ve cancelled Brexit. Let’s be honest, she was an old school Conservative who cafes about the economy and trade.

But as I have said she wouldn't have let it get to this situation. Like in the link that I provided where she has saved us 111 billion over the years from the rebate she got us. We have had nothing since nodding donkeys since Maggie.

Yes she was a bitch. But sometimes it was good to have someone strong who wouldn't back down.

 

[westcountry_skyblue]

Heard it on the radio and it was reported as 'stupid woman' but when i saw it its deffo 'stupid people'.........Surely a vote is needed on here......Whoaaaa Just read Astute's post and he reckon's 'stupid person'.....Think he could right so f the vote !

If we don’t get the result we wanted and not sure about what that traitor said we should have another vote until we win.... say best of 5 or a penalty shoot out in the commons lobby?

 

[martcov]

We didn't join up to the EU and all the rules, regulations and laws that cane with it. We joined up with the common market.

So what hasn't changed to what we joined up to and what it has become now?

We ratified all changes and took an active part in the evolution of the EU, in particular the SM. Are you trying to say that we didn’t notice the changes? Our present parliament is a lot different to, say, the situation when the Magna Carta was signed. What hasn’t changed since then? Saying that things have changed with our consent over the years is not an argument for going back to pre EU days. Just a Faragist crap and meaningless statement that people like yourself repeat thinking it means something.

 

[skybluetony176]

And there you have my point.

Some on here are trying to say that we would have had the same in every way if we still had Maggie or someone as strong as her in charge.

You seem to be spectacularly missing the point that signing the SEA is basically signing a commitment to signing Maastricht. Maarstricht is the outcome of the SEA.

 

[martcov]

But as I have said she wouldn't have let it get to this situation. Like in the link that I provided where she has saved us 111 billion over the years from the rebate she got us. We have had nothing since nodding donkeys since Maggie.

Yes she was a bitch. But sometimes it was good to have someone strong who wouldn't back down.

Yes, like when she signed up for the SM and CU which you neither like nor understand. She would not have let things get to this situation and would have kept the present day Clowns like BoJo, Davis and Fox in check. Her protege, Major, continues to criticise the sheer stupidity of Brexit.

You just make up things. She got us the rebate and she got us the SM which enabled us to have frictionless trade and unfettered access to EU financial markets for our financial services industry.

No, she wasn’t a bitch. That is just a sexist comment. I witnessed a demo in London where they chanted „ditch the bitch“. It got her loads of sympathy, including from „lefty“ women.

 

[clint van damme]

I have been saying for a couple of years that I can see us paying for the privilege. Look at the countries with EU deals that are not in the EU. They pay for the privilege.

What makes you think we would have it any differently?

but this is members of our government suggesting it because we're so ill prepared. All this money which we're supposed to be saving is going to end up getting spunked up the wall firefighting due to gross incompetence, no two ways about it.

 

[martcov]

And there you have my point.

Some on here are trying to say that we would have had the same in every way if we still had Maggie or someone as strong as her in charge.

Yes. That is what it says in FP‘s post. Maggie signed the forerunner which led to Maastricht which created the SM as Maggie wished. That was the plan. The exact opposite to what you are trying to claim. Brexit as in May‘s form takes us out of Maggie‘s SM. The post also shows that your crap about us, the UK, not willingly creating the EU and acting surprised and appalled at what the EU has become, is utter claptrap. It is not possible to know if the EU would be exactly the same if Maggie had been there the whole time, but her general commitment to trade and her having pulled the rug from under the National Front, the Party admired by the young Nigel Farage, implies that we would not have Brexit or Farage constantly on TV or in the papers presented as someone who knows what he is talking about.

 

[martcov]

I have been saying for a couple of years that I can see us paying for the privilege. Look at the countries with EU deals that are not in the EU. They pay for the privilege.

What makes you think we would have it any differently?

Exactly. I presume that is, amongst other things, the reason why you voted remain. I think we can agree on the stupidity and irony of the present form of Brexit that is being put to the vote, although there is no way we can leave the EU without taking a hit at least short term. Farage has repeatedly said, in post referendum interviews, that it was never about economics, it was about becoming an independent sovereign country. Which we were anyway. Which confirms the uselessness of the referendum. The UK is split and will probably become poorer in order to be an independent sovereign state which it already was. You can’t make this up.

 

[shmmeee]

But as I have said she wouldn't have let it get to this situation. Like in the link that I provided where she has saved us 111 billion over the years from the rebate she got us. We have had nothing since nodding donkeys since Maggie.

Yes she was a bitch. But sometimes it was good to have someone strong who wouldn't back down.

Again. Maggie wouldn’t have called a referendum and would’ve cancelled Brexit if she’d inherited it.

I hated the woman, but she wouldn’t have stood for the swivel eyed crap and infighting that is the Tory party right now.

It’s not Europe that’s missing a strong hand here, it’s the UK public and parliament. Too many cowards afraid of doing what needs to be done and tell people they fucked up.

 

[clint van damme]

Just reading a quote Nadine Dorries has made in the last day or two, she said tge rest of the world outside of the EU trade under WTO, imagine if Diane Abbot had said that?
The tories are making gaffs like this daily and showing no understanding of current events.
We are absolutely fucked with this level of stupidity governing us.

 

[martcov]

Just reading a quote Nadine Dorries has made in the last day or two, she said tge rest of the world outside of the EU trade under WTO, imagine if Diane Abbot had said that?
The tories are making gaffs like this daily and showing no understanding of current events.
We are absolutely fucked with this level of stupidity governing us.

And to add to that the absurdity of both Putin, foreign policy adversary, and Trump, proponent of the MAGA America first doctrine, pushing May to deny the public a second referendum which fits their agenda of splitting the EU, followed by total silence from the Brexiters who complained about Obama mixing in the Brexit debate, or who call remainers traitors.

They say „birds of a feather flock together“. There seems to be a synergy between social media support for Trump, Brexit and Putin. It is a bit of a joke when some Brexiters call remainers traitors whilst at the same time supporting our main potential adversaries in trade and in foreign policy.

 

[Astute]

Just reading a quote Nadine Dorries has made in the last day or two, she said tge rest of the world outside of the EU trade under WTO, imagine if Diane Abbot had said that?
The tories are making gaffs like this daily and showing no understanding of current events.
We are absolutely fucked with this level of stupidity governing us.

Which is what I have been saying about them. A waste if space. And that is the best if them.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

I have been saying for a couple of years that I can see us paying for the privilege. Look at the countries with EU deals that are not in the EU. They pay for the privilege.

What makes you think we would have it any differently?

A population of 65m, with (in relative terms to many) money to spend.
Hence, Tusk comments about Poland~UK leaving the EU...they want to sell here they have to pay too would be the likely result so in the end it would mostly balance out

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[martcov]

A population of 65m, with (in relative terms to many) money to spend.
Hence, Tusk comments about Poland~UK leaving the EU...they want to sell here they have to pay too would be the likely result so in the end it would mostly balance out

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

? Hard to understand what that is all about.

 

[martcov]

Just got a letter from my life assurance fund with Scottish Widows. They and most other insurers will be opening offices in the EU post Brexit. I have to sign a new contract with the EU subsidiary. There is a hearing on 14. March in London to approve the move. They have chosen Luxemburg because of it’s stable conjuncture and international experience of licensing cross border insurers. This costs them money which will be passed on to customers and they won’t be coming back even with a second referendum. Add to that that the English beer brand that I sell is now coming from Holland and I can see the damage that Brexit is doing in my own small world. No tangible benefits in sight as billions are spent taking on new civil servants and preparing for chaos. There are 17,4 million people who voted for this. A policy encouraged by our biggest adversaries and discouraged by our closest allies. Something wrong here.

 

[Grendel]

Just got a letter from my life assurance fund with Scottish Widows. They and most other insurers will be opening offices in the EU post Brexit. I have to sign a new contract with the EU subsidiary. There is a hearing on 14. March in London to approve the move. They have chosen Luxemburg because of it’s stable conjuncture and international experience of licensing cross border insurers. This costs them money which will be passed on to customers and they won’t be coming back even with a second referendum. Add to that that the English beer brand that I sell is now coming from Holland and I can see the damage that Brexit is doing in my own small world. No tangible benefits in sight as billions are spent taking on new civil servants and preparing for chaos. There are 17,4 million people who voted for this. A policy encouraged by our biggest adversaries and discouraged by our closest allies. Something wrong here.

Can you tell me how Scottish widows office opening will cost people money?

 

[martcov]

Can you tell me how Scottish widows office opening will cost people money?

The administration. The setting up costs of a subsidiary. The preparation for and the representation at a hearing in London. Maybe office space, extra staff etc.. Not a fortune, but an unnecessary expense. How‘s the job situation at JLR coming along?