The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (16 Viewers)

martcov · Aug 29, 2018

Ä

Grendel said:
Be honest when it comes to monetary policy you are really found wanting. Your reply makes no sense

The sense being, it is possible to have poorer and richer areas in a federal union or the Eurozone. The problem with the Eurozone as opposed to, say, the federal Bundesrepublik or USA, is that there isn’t a mechanism to transfer surplus to deficit areas/ countries. There isn’t a unified fiscal system and different tax rates distort the economies. The Eurozone needs a transfer system and a coordinated fiscal policy similar to that of a single country. Macron has identified that problem, but the richer countries don’t want to balance out the effects on the poorer countries. Schulz also saw that, but got kicked out of power in his own party.

chiefdave · Aug 29, 2018

Finally some good news and a deal agreed.

May has got an agreement in principle with SACU (South Africa, Swaziland, Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and Lesotho), which account for 0.7% of our exports, to replicate the current EU deal.

Just need to sort WTO tariffs, quotas, rules of origin, favoured nation clauses etc and with them and we'll be good to go. That is likely to take in the region of 18 - 24 months.

dutchman · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
It was sarcasm... but true... someone else referred to the „news“. I googled and saw that the Mail claimed that the pound had „soared“. That’s why I later told posted the spread in the last 52 weeks. It had gone up, but not „soared“. Which is why the Mail is, as you say, a rag.

That's normal though, even for respected financial sources. They say something 'soared' or 'plummeted' even if it moved by only 0.1 per cent. I long ago learned to ignore such headlines.

dutchman · Aug 30, 2018

Why did Michel Barnier's latest Brexit remarks give the pound such a boost?

Josie Dent, an economist at the Centre for Economics and Business Research, believes it’s a combination of factors.

“I think the main message is a change of tone. It’s good news for Theresa May that he’s saying that he wants to make a deal and he wants it to be a good deal for the UK.

“I think today’s comments show he’s willing to accommodate some of what the UK wants in a way that he hasn’t said before.”

“The pound is volatile at the moment, it reacts to any news quite strongly and a lot of traders are trading on the pound in the way they haven’t in previous years so we saw a strong appreciation today but we could easily see it undo over the next day or so just because it is so volatile.”

“Many people in the market had been worried that we wouldn’t get any deal at all, so this is a strong indication that there will be a deal which is why we’ve seen this appreciation of the pound.”

Caveat: I don't necessarily agree with any of the above quotes.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
What was the election called? Who was allowed to vote?

Nobody was allowed to vote. And you know it.

Let's remind you. An email was sent out naming Selmayr in a post. Then another email was sent out saying who the two candidates were for the job. Then another email was sent out saying the person who was standing against Selmayr had pulled out. And all in 14 minutes.

The election was called a scam. And as you know most people in the EU complained about it. But what could they do when the person at the top was the person who got the job through the scam?

So they said it wouldn't happen again. You was happy with that. So are they as it is a job for life.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
Ä

The sense being, it is possible to have poorer and richer areas in a federal union or the Eurozone. The problem with the Eurozone as opposed to, say, the federal Bundesrepublik or USA, is that there isn’t a mechanism to transfer surplus to deficit areas/ countries. There isn’t a unified fiscal system and different tax rates distort the economies. The Eurozone needs a transfer system and a coordinated fiscal policy similar to that of a single country. Macron has identified that problem, but the richer countries don’t want to balance out the effects on the poorer countries. Schulz also saw that, but got kicked out of power in his own party.

So you agree with what I said.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

chiefdave said:
Finally some good news and a deal agreed.

May has got an agreement in principle with SACU (South Africa, Swaziland, Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and Lesotho), which account for 0.7% of our exports, to replicate the current EU deal.

Just need to sort WTO tariffs, quotas, rules of origin, favoured nation clauses etc and with them and we'll be good to go. That is likely to take in the region of 18 - 24 months.

Don’t forget the 4bn in investment.

And, this deal will only give us what we would have had ... without the 4 bn. Banks has business down there and was accused of making donations to a Lesotho political party to help get mining licenses. Might be good news for him.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
Nobody was allowed to vote. And you know it.

Let's remind you. An email was sent out naming Selmayr in a post. Then another email was sent out saying who the two candidates were for the job. Then another email was sent out saying the person who was standing against Selmayr had pulled out. And all in 14 minutes.

The election was called a scam. And as you know most people in the EU complained about it. But what could they do when the person at the top was the person who got the job through the scam?

So they said it wouldn't happen again. You was happy with that. So are they as it is a job for life.

Who are „they“? I thought „they“ were unhappy or angry. What election?

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
So you agree with what I said.

You say lots of things. If you mean that I agree with people like Macron on this issue, yes.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

dutchman said:
Why did Michel Barnier's latest Brexit remarks give the pound such a boost?

Josie Dent, an economist at the Centre for Economics and Business Research, believes it’s a combination of factors.

“I think the main message is a change of tone. It’s good news for Theresa May that he’s saying that he wants to make a deal and he wants it to be a good deal for the UK.

“I think today’s comments show he’s willing to accommodate some of what the UK wants in a way that he hasn’t said before.”

“The pound is volatile at the moment, it reacts to any news quite strongly and a lot of traders are trading on the pound in the way they haven’t in previous years so we saw a strong appreciation today but we could easily see it undo over the next day or so just because it is so volatile.”

“Many people in the market had been worried that we wouldn’t get any deal at all, so this is a strong indication that there will be a deal which is why we’ve seen this appreciation of the pound.”

Caveat: I don't necessarily agree with any of the above quotes.

You said Brexit had no effect. She says it’s all about whether we get a good deal or not.

I agree with her. I also think that Barnier is offering virtually the same as before, but that is obviously better than no deal. The question is whether Brexiters will accept a form of BINO?

See what happens next.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
Nobody was allowed to vote. And you know it.

Let's remind you. An email was sent out naming Selmayr in a post. Then another email was sent out saying who the two candidates were for the job. Then another email was sent out saying the person who was standing against Selmayr had pulled out. And all in 14 minutes.

The election was called a scam. And as you know most people in the EU complained about it. But what could they do when the person at the top was the person who got the job through the scam?

So they said it wouldn't happen again. You was happy with that. So are they as it is a job for life.

As regards me being „happy“, you keep mentioning that I said it was annoying = it annoyed me. I will be voting at The EU elections and more than likely for a party not in his group. What will you be doing about it?

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
Who are „they“? I thought „they“ were unhappy or angry. What election?

Yes what election. There wasn't one but should have been one. And the job should have been advertised. Nobody even knew it was available. And you have admitted to all of it in the past. But now as usual your memory fails you when needed.

S&Ds: the Selmayr scandal was a disgrace for all EU institutions. Commission must adopt new, more transparent, rules by September 2018 and reassess the post

Appointment of secretary general draws ire of MEPs

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
As regards me being „happy“, you keep mentioning that I said it was annoying = it annoyed me. I will be voting at The EU elections and more than likely for a party not in his group. What will you be doing about it?

So we can do something about it?

A strange comment to make considering the MEP's couldn't do a thing about it.

SkyblueBazza · Aug 30, 2018

Isn't it funny how some people have a positive attitude whilst others have a negative one on these matters.

A negative comment by a Brexiteer is reported & it is seized upon. A change of tone & a positive slant from Barnier himself...it's mostly not commented upon.

People say there are no positives...& question Britain's commitment to developing nations. Then scoff at the latest agreement with SA nations. We are helping them develop...& laying strong foundations for the future. Their developing prosperity is also prosperous for us!

Some seem to WANT the UK to fail so they can sneer all the more!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
So we can do something about it?

A strange comment to make considering the MEP's couldn't do a thing about it.

Answer the question please. No, the appointment was legal. That stands. Doesn’t alter the fact that if people don’t like Juncker’s group, they can vote for Bannon’s chosen people. I won’t of course.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

SkyblueBazza said:
Isn't it funny how some people have a positive attitude whilst others have a negative one on these matters.

A negative comment by a Brexiteer is reported & it is seized upon. A change of tone & a positive slant from Barnier himself...it's mostly not commented upon.

People say there are no positives...& question Britain's commitment to developing nations. Then scoff at the latest agreement with SA nations. We are helping them develop...& laying strong foundations for the future. Their developing prosperity is also prosperous for us!

Some seem to WANT the UK to fail so they can sneer all the more!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

We are copying an EU deal and throwing 4bn in to get it.

You are, in effect, saying that the EU deal was helping by committing to developing SA Nations.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
Yes what election. There wasn't one but should have been one. And the job should have been advertised. Nobody even knew it was available. And you have admitted to all of it in the past. But now as usual your memory fails you when needed.

S&Ds: the Selmayr scandal was a disgrace for all EU institutions. Commission must adopt new, more transparent, rules by September 2018 and reassess the post

Appointment of secretary general draws ire of MEPs

Yes, a compromise was voted on which accepted the appointment. Apparently it will be reassessed by September. Not exactly as you portrayed it. It appears that something may happen at the reassessment and that in future such appointments will be more transparent.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
Answer the question please. No, the appointment was legal. That stands. Doesn’t alter the fact that if people don’t like Juncker’s group, they can vote for Bannon’s chosen people. I won’t of course.

It was only legal because there isn't a law on how the EU puts people in place. It didn't follow procedures. That is why they said it wouldn't happen again. And he has the job for life.

But of course you will twist the truth. It is what we have come to expect from you on the matter.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
Yes, a compromise was voted on which accepted the appointment. Apparently it will be reassessed by September. Not exactly as you portrayed it. It appears that something may happen at the reassessment and that in future such appointments will be more transparent.

So what have I said that was wrong? They had a choice. Try to get rid of Juncker. Screw the whole system up. And then there was no way of knowing if it would work. It is all in the links I provided for you.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
So what have I said that was wrong? They had a choice. Try to get rid of Juncker. Screw the whole system up. And then there was no way of knowing if it would work. It is all in the links I provided for you.

In the links, the "lefties" have accepted the compromise vote, but want the reassessment by September. According to you MEPs can do nothing. The fact there will be a reassessment ( whether anything happens then? ), together with future transparency, is a statement that something is being done. I am annoyed, they are annoyed, people are annoyed. Things are in motion to prevent this happening again. Seeing as the enquiry claims that the appointment was legal, it is difficult, but other than voting, say, for the "lefties" what do you expect me to do?

Voting leave and hurting the UK and EU hasn't solved anything. The Socialists within the EU are trying to do something to improve things, which is the sensible way of going about it. What will you be doing?

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
It was only legal because there isn't a law on how the EU puts people in place. It didn't follow procedures. That is why they said it wouldn't happen again. And he has the job for life.

But of course you will twist the truth. It is what we have come to expect from you on the matter.

What have I twisted? You on the other hand omitted the "reassessment" by September.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
In the links, the "lefties" have accepted the compromise vote, but want the reassessment by September. According to you MEPs can do nothing. The fact there will be a reassessment ( whether anything happens then? ), together with future transparency, is a statement that something is being done. I am annoyed, they are annoyed, people are annoyed. Things are in motion to prevent this happening again. Seeing as the enquiry claims that the appointment was legal, it is difficult, but other than voting, say, for the "lefties" what do you expect me to do?

Voting leave and hurting the UK and EU hasn't solved anything. The Socialists within the EU are trying to do something to improve things, which is the sensible way of going about it. What will you be doing?

Something is being done?

Will the job be advertised like the rules and regulations say? No.

Will Selmayr keep the position that he didn't rightfully get? Yes.

So nothing is being done about the situation. Just lip service. And you know it.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
What have I twisted? You on the other hand omitted the "reassessment" by September.

You make out that it is lawful. But you always miss out that there isn't any laws on the matter. Now if not following rules and regulations was against the law then it wouldn't be lawful. But they twist and break the rules and regulations as they please. And nobody can do anything about it.

So what will this 'reassessment' solve? Absolutely nothing. It is the same as them saying that it won't happen again. It doesn't have to as he has the top job in the EU for life. And the vast majority of MEP's will continue to be pissed off with the way it happened.

skybluetony176 · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
It was only legal because there isn't a law on how the EU puts people in place. It didn't follow procedures. That is why they said it wouldn't happen again. And he has the job for life.

But of course you will twist the truth. It is what we have come to expect from you on the matter.

Q) who voted Teresa May leader of the Conservative party and by default prime minister of the U.K.?

A) no one.

Gordon Brown, same. That’s two times it’s happened in the UK in the last 11 years and John Major first became PM after being voted leader by party members, the public didn’t vote him in as PM initially.

You’re going on like what has happened in the EU is an exception, it isn’t. It’s the rule. God knows why you’re wasting so much time on it, it’s irrelevant. Completely.

Captain Dart · Aug 30, 2018

skybluetony176 said:
Q) who voted Teresa May leader of the Conservative party and by default prime minister of the U.K.?

A) no one.

Gordon Brown, same. That’s two times it’s happened in the UK in the last 11 years and John Major first became PM after being voted leader by party members, the public didn’t vote him in as PM initially.

You’re going on like what has happened in the EU is an exception, it isn’t. It’s the rule. God knows why you’re wasting so much time on it, it’s irrelevant. Completely.

You show how little you understand, he is a political crony appointed to a job which should be done by a civil servant.
There is little if any evidence he is able to carry out the tasks in the impartial manner required.
Selmayr scandal will tarnish Juncker’s legacy

SkyblueBazza · Aug 30, 2018

skybluetony176 said:
Q) who voted Teresa May leader of the Conservative party and by default prime minister of the U.K.?

A) no one.

Gordon Brown, same. That’s two times it’s happened in the UK in the last 11 years and John Major first became PM after being voted leader by party members, the public didn’t vote him in as PM initially.

You’re going on like what has happened in the EU is an exception, it isn’t. It’s the rule. God knows why you’re wasting so much time on it, it’s irrelevant. Completely.

Keep-up...she won the Tory party leadership election first and retained her assumed PM position as her party were elected as the biggest single party in our parliament. Which is basically how our democratic process works. Shame but really, there were not many characters about that would have been much better imo

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

skybluetony176 said:
Q) who voted Teresa May leader of the Conservative party and by default prime minister of the U.K.?

A) no one.

Gordon Brown, same. That’s two times it’s happened in the UK in the last 11 years and John Major first became PM after being voted leader by party members, the public didn’t vote him in as PM initially.

You’re going on like what has happened in the EU is an exception, it isn’t. It’s the rule. God knows why you’re wasting so much time on it, it’s irrelevant. Completely.

Are you trying to ignore that rules and procedures were not followed by Juncker who pushed through the Selmayr debacle?

The correct procedures were followed by the ones you named. They were not done under the radar then announced like Selmayr was.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
Are you trying to ignore that rules and procedures were not followed by Juncker who pushed through the Selmayr debacle?

The correct procedures were followed by the ones you named. They were not done under the radar then announced like Selmayr was.

What was the vote? Who was entitled to vote for this civil servant? Was Olli Robins elected? Yes, the appointment was a sham.

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
You make out that it is lawful. But you always miss out that there isn't any laws on the matter. Now if not following rules and regulations was against the law then it wouldn't be lawful. But they twist and break the rules and regulations as they please. And nobody can do anything about it.

So what will this 'reassessment' solve? Absolutely nothing. It is the same as them saying that it won't happen again. It doesn't have to as he has the top job in the EU for life. And the vast majority of MEP's will continue to be pissed off with the way it happened.

Do you know what reassessment means?

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
What was the vote? Who was entitled to vote for this civil servant? Was Olli Robins elected? Yes, the appointment was a sham.

Guide to the Conservative leadership race

This was after the others had been knocked out. All above board.

Now remind us how Selmayr got his position.....

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
Do you know what reassessment means?

Do you know what the word 'truth' means?

skybluetony176 · Aug 30, 2018

SkyblueBazza said:
Keep-up...she won the Tory party leadership election first and retained her assumed PM position as her party were elected as the biggest single party in our parliament. Which is basically how our democratic process works. Shame but really, there were not many characters about that would have been much better imo

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

She won it by default when Andrea Leadsom withdrew before the third ballot took place.

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

skybluetony176 said:
She won it by default when Andrea Leadsom withdrew before the third ballot took place.

Third ballot.......

When she knew she was miles behind.

So how many ballots did Selmayr need? Exactly none. Two people applied for a job that wasn't advertised. It wasn't even known to be coming available as it is a job for life. And it was OK because it was a woman up against him. But she instantly withdrew......Selmayr got the job.......And she was then given another high up position.

So where is the similarities?

martcov · Aug 30, 2018

Astute said:
Guide to the Conservative leadership race

This was after the others had been knocked out. All above board.

Now remind us how Selmayr got his position.....

I was asking what vote you are talking about for Selmayr?

Astute · Aug 30, 2018

martcov said:
I was asking what vote you are talking about for Selmayr?

The one that didn't take place. The one you are trying to make out wasn't needed.

Do you really think that we are all thick?

The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (16 Viewers)

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

Remain

Leave

Undecided

Not registered or not intention to vote

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency