Customize

Brexit: the UK goes full retard

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by The Internet, Jun 24, 2016.

  1. Matthew might have also mentioned Bre-evaluation by new 'Brexit means Brexit' PM Theresa May, or how about Brecount? Must've been a hanging chad or two, shurely?
    • Like Like x 1
  2. The Internet Member

    Because people make an effort on behalf of the truth.

    We don't need a perfect method of separating fact from fiction. We just need to understand the method we have and then try our best not to cheat.

    But like you say, facts don't depend on what an individual thinks. They depend upon evidence and sound methods for weighing evidence.

    Nobody gives a fig what I think about the Brexit campaign. So I don't see why my assessment of the facts matters. People living in the UK and following the discussions there will be better sources than me. I simply repeat what I hear those sources saying.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. It's simple: Britisch steel goes bust. = Full blown recession and a few EU economies going down the toilet. British Steel survives= Low growth for everybody.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...best-brexit-theresa-may-could-get-for-britain

  4. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/16/science-research-hit-by-brexit

  5. And there are the first cracks while everybody is celebrating the "strong"economy after the Brexit.

    A stock exchange chart says nothing about jobs in manufacturing:

  6. http://www.business-standard.com/ar...een-priced-in-mihir-doshi-116072500920_1.html

  7. Attached Files:

  8. Random guy Member

    The question should be whether a no-vote would have made things different. The world has a surplus of steel producers, that's about the long and short of it. It's horrible for people in the Western world to loose a low-skill job like this, but I don't think it's fair to blame it in Brexit.
  9. Sekee Member

    The closure of Tata Steel in the UK has been going long before the EU referendum. The issues are that China has been flooding the EU with their heavily state subsidised steel and with our high energy prices. We are not able to compete. This has not been helped by the conservatives voting against action by the EU.
  10. It seems TATA favours the Netherlands and wants to dump Port Talbot


  11. The Netherlands "Hoogovens" would not have been in the picture for a 200 million Euro investment on the part of TATA steel before Brexit.

    It has been a question for 40 years wich country could maintain a steel Indusrty. The UK or the Netherlands.

    Who was it that boasted about British Steel and Britains "strong" manufacturing base???
  12. Mann Ace Member

    What action have the conservatives voted against that might have addressed the problem?
  13. Oopsy ! There goes your comfy retirement folks, Brensioners ?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...it-eu-referendum-bhs-tata-steel-a7156491.html

    Some financial mumbo jumb:

    AND THE GRANDE FINALE:

    shotfoot.jpg
  14. Sekee Member


  15. Mann Ace Member

    Thanks. Protectionism, then. Economic nonsense, but it sure plays to the masses.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Great Britain:

    As the Internet puts it:

    "Goodnight sweet Prince"
  17. Random guy Member


    Aren't you possibly overdoing it a bit?
    • Like Like x 2

  18. http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-lloyds-results-idUKKCN1080GG

  19. JohnnyRUClear Member

    "While the business will remain highly capital generative, it is possible that this capital generation may be somewhat lower in future years than previously guided"

    Clearly we are all doomed.

  20. Wales seems to be heading that way:

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/tata-must-not-walk-away-11678280

    ComunionJPG.jpg
  21. Mann Ace Member

    Take a deep breath, KKS. It's gonna take some time for all this to shake out. Until then, it's all just speculation. We won't know the full effects for years.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. JohnnyRUClear Member

    "The European founders of the EU are mythical creatures. Washington used politicians that Washington controlled to create the EU."
    --Paul Craig Roberts

    (There is a mangled link in the article which is a jumble of 2 links. The link in the article fetches an error message. Here are the 2 correct URLs: link1 link2 The second is largely a re-presentation of the first. I recommend the first.)
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Actually The Netherlands control the rest of the world by means of the Bilderberg group wich is headed by the Evil Lord Xenu. DOX:

    Lord Xenu A.K.A Prince Bernhard the FOUNDER of the Bilderberg group watching the germans capitulate in the Netherlands and Lord Xenu smoking

    hotel_de_wereld_2.jpg

    Prins+Bernhard.jpg



    • Like Like x 1

  24. LESSON

    The founders of the European Union are 6 COUNTRIES:

    The Netherlands
    Belgium
    Luxemburg
    France
    Germany
    Italy


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community

    England came in in 1973 and was basicly America's bitch doing it's bidding within the EU.
  25. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Wikipedia is fine for looking up the size of a bird or a map of a country. What do you think about delving into covert ops and hidden agendas? Is Wikipedia a reliable resource for that? Why or why not?

    What I like about the material I linked to is that it's based on documents which became available at (or just prior to) the time of AEP's Telegraph article. That's how journalism should (at least IMO) work: dox become available, and journos tell us about them. In this case, the dox reveal major covert influence of "American"* entities in the early formation of what eventually became the EU.

    What does Wikipedia say about why this information is absent from its entry about the formation of the EU?

    * I put the scare quotes there because much of what has been done in the name of America has nothing at all to do with America as we Americans know it, and many -- or even most -- Americans are not even aware that it has happened.
    • Like Like x 1
  26. Well here is the https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Union




    130624-004-0BDAC008.jpg

  27. Mann Ace Member

    Well, Johnny, I guess you've been told...that KKS doesn't quite understand your point. But by god he'll make up for it with volume, lots and lots of copypasta (haven't used that term for a while)

    It's like speaking louder to a foreigner who doesn't speak the language, figuring that will make up for the lack of a common tongue.
    • Like Like x 1
  28. Of course the FUCKING Americans wanted PEACE and PROSPERITY in Europe so they didn't have to go over here and rescue us a THIRD TIME

    The European project aimed for PEACE and PROSPERITY

    Maybe these concepts are foreign to you.
  29. Simple talk First is was to create an economic bond between Germany and France so they would become so entangled with eachother economicly that going at war with eachouther would not be in either countries intrest.

    That was the "Evil" American intent behind it Just after World War II.

  30. Mann Ace Member

    This is where we differ. You seem to think that because a politician says "We want peace and prosperity" they actually want peace and prosperity. I find attitude that to be hopelessly helplessly naive.

    Politicians want power over other people. That is the very nature of the game. They want power. Everything else is subordinate to that craving.

    People who believe in government are falling for one of the two best long cons ever invented.
    And oddly, it just came to me that one of the long cons (religion) is actually a good buffer against the other long con (politics).

    The world is a weird and wonderful place.
    • Like Like x 1
  31. JohnnyRUClear Member

    (Note: I was crafting this, and then posted it, while Mann Ace was posting his entry, above, so I didn't see his. I'll let mine stand "as is" despite now being a bit redundant.)

    (The words in bold seem garbled, but I think I understand their intended meaning.)

    I never said "evil". I said "covert". Whether the real -- or even the professed -- intent was evil is more subjective, and correspondingly more debatable. I do note that all of what you posted here seems like it could have come straight from the EU itself. If you consider that to be a reliable guide to understanding the EU, it's no wonder you're so (apparently) tone-deaf to the objections of the opposition.

    Frankly, my own sentiments about covert activities by "American" entities are somewhat complex; I am generally skeptical, but don't have enough broad familiarity to state that all of them are evil, or even "bad" on balance. Re: involvement in the formation of the EU, specifically, I'm (surprise!) skeptical, but I haven't taken a position on whether it was a good or bad thing (though I'm leaning bad at this point).

    For the record, philosophically, I am 100% in agreement that getting countries to trade and travel smoothly between one another is a great way to help lower the chances of war between them; nobody wants their friends, relatives, or business partners attacked. As such, increasing these kinds of peaceable interactions is, in itself, a good thing (for those who want to avoid war, as I do). However, there are wrong ways to do the right thing, and there are endless examples of cynical manipulators using attractive political "stalking horses" to accomplish ulterior agendas. Then there's good old hubris, always plentiful in the spawning grounds of gigantic political efforts. Somewhere amongst those factors, enough "issues" arose over time to prompt the UK to -- just barely -- vote for Brexit in 2016.

    It's not the end of the world, just the end of one arrangement, for crying out loud. There were countless prior ones and there will presumably be lots more in the future. I suggest that those of you who are unhappy stop whining and start thinking up a better arrangement to propose. Maybe try to learn from both (a) the benefits -- real and/or perceived -- of EU membership and (b) the problems -- again, real and/or perceived -- to which people have objected, and fashion a new potential arrangement accordingly. (I've seen some suggestions about this sort of thing already, and it seems inevitable that that is what will happen.)

    Anyway, still no explanation from Wikipedia (or the EB) on why they don't mention the covert "American" influence at all? Your opinion (which does have a logic to it, although I still might challenge its accuracy) is noted, but that's not from Wikipedia.
  32. JohnnyRUClear Member

    I'm not sure what you mean by "buffer". Are you suggesting it's in the nature of a "balance" (as in "checks and balances")? Or something else? Please elaborate.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins