Maybe having a tobacco giant in the Czech Republic will persuade a few Nimby brexiters that the EU isn't so bad.

Just for reference it's Kutna Hora

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedlec_Ossuary

 

Changing the topic, Merkel has announced if any legislative changes need to be made after the Berlin attack they will be. Interesting times

 

Bit out of touch I'm afraid, just got BBC news and the guardian website to go on

http://www.euronews.com/

http://www.france24.com/en/

http://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-to-review-security-after-berlin-market-attack-anis-amri/

eu - US hormone treated beef:

https://euobserver.com/tickers/136402

https://euobserver.com/tickers/136405

Brexit – six months on: Immigration and free movement

the Prime Minister stated that “we are not leaving the EU to give up control of immigration again”, and rejected a ‘points- based system’ as proposed by Vote Leave;

and the Chancellor said it would still enable labour mobility for highly skilled professionals in the financial sector;

we know little about:

• whether the Government seriously intends to set policy so as to achieve the “tens of thousands” target within a given timeframe, or whether – as in the last Parliament – this will remain an aspiration
  
• the implications for border controls, both in general and specifically at the Northern Irish border
  

Other (EU) member states have maintained a united front. Their position remains that free movement – as one of the ‘four freedoms’ – is fundamental to both the EU and single market, and that if the UK is not prepared to accept free movement it cannot hope to replicate anything resembling current arrangements for trade in goods and services (including financial services).

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-six-months-on-immigration-and-free-movement/

and of course what should have been done long ago, but is as stated with the UK's (not just May who is unfairly targeted in my opinion) strong stance on the key brexit issue - free movement:

Free movement does not mean the automatic right to live in another member state or immediately access the benefit system, and Germany and some other member states have made clear that further changes to the detailed practical operation of free movement remain on the agenda. If the UK maintains the stance set out so far by the Prime Minister, this may be of limited Brexit relevance. If, however, the UK shifted to prioritise single market membership, there would be more room for discussion and possible compromise.

Problem for government is that they face opposition from so many sides.

1) those who are against Brexit and want continued EU membership 16 million + people

2) those who want Brexit, but want single market/customs area access as currently. guestimate 8 millon + people

3) those who want Brexit, leave the EU single market/customs area and total independence. Guestimate 8 million + people.

I would guess that there is a big majority in favour of a softer Brexit, even if that means that freedom of movement is maintained. There is no reason why Theresa May cannot negotiate terms applying to EU mainland nationals coming to the UK e.g migrants have to have jobs to come to, they need funds to pay for living costs including accommodation.

Most businesses are going to want freedom of movement and no import/export tariffs applying to UK/EU trade.

There is no majority in parliament in favour of a hard Brexit, with worse access to EU market and implications for UK trade. The UK imports so much and any tariffs applied to imports would seriously affect our economy, as well as affect consumer prices causing inflation.

I do wonder if this country will ever recover from the divisions of the Brexit vote let alone the economic disaster that has and is still happening. yes i know the Express and Wail keep going on about how things are looking better but I think if you ask many people they will agree that things are not feeling better , hell most people I know still don't feel that things are improving after the crash 8 years ago. Companies are still giving below inflation or no pay rises after years of pay cuts and no rises, god alone knows where the figures for wage inflation come from - probably the haves as opposed to the have nots.

I will be surprised if May is still Pm in 2020 before the next scheduled election but there again I was surprised that the Tories won in 2015 with such a majority.

I do think that many people have been well and truly hoodwinked by the elite/bourgeoisie into believing they are or have a chance of joining them, if only the UK was independent. The working class , and yes from a purely Marxist perspective nearly everyone on these boards and in the country are working class even if they think they are not - we work or contribute so that the top people with influence just keep getting richer and more powerful

As things stand, I think there will be a hard Brexit, and real attempts to return to Dickensian values - which appear to be the reasons behind the high-up Brexiters even if they aren't the will of the Brexit populace, and the speedy break up of the union

The other option is paying for access to the EU for certain 'elite' (undoubtedly Mays main focus) while everyone else suffers - and the wider break up of the union - with a good chance of sections of the North of England down as far as the Midlands or beyond trying to secede with Scotland and rejoin the EU - whatever they voted in the referendum.

Depends how strongly the populace respond to the crap they are going to be dealt - however well its spun up.

May et al are of course hoping the plebs will just suck it up, believing they can do nothing.

Just a little reminder from a few posts back

"Free movement does not mean the automatic right to live in another member state or immediately access the benefit system, and Germany and some other member states have made clear that further changes to the detailed practical operation of free movement remain on the agenda.

As they always were, Not just during Camerons 'renegotiation' which ignored this crucial issue, but all the time and as already implemented by some EU states.

Now imagine if Cameron had renegotiated this (or even just implemented some of the possible ways to address concerns as some EU states have) rather than just try to protect 'The City'.

How do we think the referendum would have resulted with that done?

Why is this - one of the major reasons is low UK wages and lots of benefit top ups so taxpayers subsidise industry.

As things stand, I think there will be a hard Brexit, and real attempts to return to Dickensian values - which appear to be the reasons behind the high-up Brexiters even if they aren't the will of the Brexit populace, and the speedy break up of the union

 

The other option is paying for access to the EU for certain 'elite' (undoubtedly Mays main focus) while everyone else suffers - and the wider break up of the union - with a good chance of sections of the North of England down as far as the Midlands or beyond trying to secede with Scotland and rejoin the EU - whatever they voted in the referendum.

 

Depends how strongly the populace respond to the crap they are going to be dealt - however well its spun up.

 

May et al are of course hoping the plebs will just suck it up, believing they can do nothing.

So I wonder how long it will be until we are paying to watch the lunatics in the asylum - ops sorry we are already doing that when we watch TV and see MPs in action

It does actually seem that the lunatics are running the asylum

Just look at Johnson and Farage and tell me it doesn't look like an advert for a remake of One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest.

Mind you, two have already pretty much left the sinking ship haven't they:

F.O. Boris

U.S. Farage

I dont think Trump would let either of the others in, and Boris sneaks in via Canada.

Then again, Boris does seem to have tangled the mooring line around his neck, even if Farage quickly fled down that line leaving some droppings on Boris' nose as he passed.

Although there may be more to come form the following yet :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38495175

For those who want to understand some of the real issues and facts around migration, and understand that EU countries including Germany have issues with people who have not paid into benefit systems claiming:

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/284

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25134521

Surprised at you Tobyjug2 using Migrant Watch as source material, an ultra right wing pressure group.

ll

I wonder when it will be realised that Brexit is not happening. I predict Theresa May will back out of Brexit by Autumn 2017 and face a leadership contest.

Surprised at you Tobyjug2 using Migrant Watch as source material, an ultra right wing pressure group.

ll

Just because they often present things in a biased way, doesn't mean they are wrong or lying ALL the time about EVERYTHING

.. we aren't talking about a Hunt or a Gove here just some right wing fanatics

Some of the information there is valid and worthy of consideration, and I do try to look at things from all angles before coming to a conclusion.

Interesting opinion there Unc.

I have no idea what they will do. I think May will go all out to trigger article 50 no matter what hoping that will cause a lot of people to give up - and it might

I agree Toby

While MW may frame the data in a particular way the underlying data may be good and valid

AS you know there are tow quote I really believe in

Lies. damned lies and statistics

and

If you torture the data long enough, it will confess

Incidentally , I am ot sure where they get the figure for average pay from, anyone actually writing anything should specify , mean or median

I suspect this figure is the mean, skewed by the stupid sums earned by the few

Just a thought here about the ref vote. We have trials by jury. From all walks of life to decide on a court case. They listen to the evidence but there is also gut feeling involved. The jury system is with us and so the EU ref mirrors that same format. Everyone eligible was given the chance to vote. You would have to argue against our whole democratic system if you feel the EU ref was not bonifide.

its not the ref result in issue. its whats going to happen now given the stupidity of it.

for me, theres's no point being 'in' but not quite in like the norwegians or the canadians for eg. it's either remain, or get out fully and see how it goes (whilst keeping in mind that most of the reasons put forward for exit wont change eg immigration, free movement, more money for the nhs, etc).

but, it cant be the latter when May is promising the likes of the city, motor industry etc full access, and yet just today she's saying there cant be bits and pieces to be 'in' the eu but out. what a mess. anyway, shldn't be posting here. good luck.

Glad you posted Ford:-D Messy May

I agree Toby

 

While MW may frame the data in a particular way the underlying data may be good and valid

 

AS you know there are tow quote I really believe in

 

Lies. damned lies and statistics

and

If you torture the data long enough, it will confess

just like the latest interpretation that unsecured (eg credit card) debt is at record highs - twice the level of a year ago, and that just the interest on this is costing and average of 1/4 of peoples net income,

Yet this is the same high levels of unsecured debt that was touted as evidence of 'high consumer confidence' after Brexit by some just a month or two ago.

Since when was hammering the credit cards and payday loans at record levels ever anything but either stupidity or desperation?

The thing about our constitution or lack of it is that we are a representative democracy and do not rule the country by mob rule. There should never have been a referendum and even when there was it was not binding. The Scottish referendum of 1979 gave a similar result to the eu one yet nothing was done. Ok so it led directly to the fall of the labour government and the installation of the most hated Tory leader of all time but hey ho.

May can not last much longer surely.

Everyone eligible was given the chance to vote. You would have to argue against our whole democratic system if you feel the EU ref was not bonifide.

Perhaps, but not necessarily.

Few people, if any, can have all the relevant information, so I posit that we vote based on the information given and the policies stated, and should rightly expect that

* The information given is as clear, concise and honest as possible (and that doesn't mean as politically or personally expedient)

* The policies stated are carried out as expected by the voting populace without needing weasel words to justify what they actually do.

Point 1

So unless there is

* 350M a week extra for the NHS

* A stop to ALL immigration and a move to a points based system or better yet a job offer immigration system

* The actually impossible in the modern world pre-emminence of UK law

(what about agreements with other countries, like the likely upcoming UK/US agreement where US companies will sue the UK government under US LAW not UK LAW if the UK doesn't allow US pharmaceuticals to sell stuff to the UK NHS which contain UK banned ingredients)

Consider also courts like the UN's international court of Justice (despite the USA having urinated all over that already by choosing what they abide by).

Or do we just walk away from the UN and all our international agreements?

Become like North Korea?

So unless ALL these are met as stated by the main protagonists during the referendum

Brexit is NOT the referendum Brexit

Point 2

Lies and withheld information aside (which should negate the referendum and have the parties in court for treason, abuse of office and many other charges)

The ONLY possible remit that was given by the advisory referendum is very specific, and is to simply leave the EU,

NOT to renegotiate (secret or otherwise) with the EU or anyone else,

SO.. as at least one stated goal of Brexit cannot realistically be met,

.. and none, especially the only real remit (whether or not that was the voters intent), will be met

- its far worse than a farce, and cannot be considered valid for anything except as a reason to permanently eject many of our current politicians.

and I defy anyone to realistically and justifiably dispute those observations.

Incidentally , I am ot sure where they get the figure for average pay from, anyone actually writing anything should specify , mean or median

 

I suspect this figure is the mean, skewed by the stupid sums earned by the few

Apparently, in 2013/14 with the top 10% earners stripped out:

The average salary for the lower paid 90% of the population was under £13K

compared to the £24500 - £26,500 (ons vs equity trust figures) national average with the top 10% included.

The median average for the bottom 20 per cent was £5,521

and we all know the differential has massively increased since then.

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/01/23/average-wages-for-90-per-cent-of-british-workers-are-less-than-half-what-youve-been-told/

Following Mays statements:

Banks with large London operations say they will step up lobbying European officials because they are running out of arguments to convince the British government the industry needs single market access after Britain leaves the European Union.

The focus is shifting because after scores of meetings and research reports, banks, which say they may begin moving staff and operations out of London in the next few months if there is no clarity, feel they are running out of new points to make.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-banks-idUKKBN14U176

HSBC chairman says banks may trigger Brexit contigency plans by March

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-finance-idUKKBN14U1FR

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?470412-Article-50-Discussion&p=4981223&viewfull=1#post4981223

Determinatior

While I agree with Toby regarding the lies you are missing the whole point of our democracy.

We live in a representative democracy and not a direct one. For that reason and that reason alone there should never have been a referendum.

If you believe we need direct democracy , that needs adopting by a political party as a manifesto pledge and changes made.

Incidentally, come the glorious day after the revolution there will be no democracy just a benign dictatorship because as proven the electorate can not be trusted, he'll they voted the Tories in, isn't that enough!

I doubt folk will read those links I gave well enough, so I'll highlight that they almost certainly highlight Mays plans.

They (May and Osbourne) want the bankers to start lobbying the EU statesmen to get effectively a sliding reduction in their access to the single market and passporting with the EU completely on board on this.

This means May will not have to lobby hard to get the bankers preferential treatment with the political fallout that would generate, and the bankers would get more time to move while keeping access to the EU AND the protection of the UK government from EU regs and requirements much of which protection they will lose once they do move into the EU proper (which is why they want to stay here if they can get free access)

May would avoid immediate fallout of a rapid exodus and the issue of banks moving abroad would be someone elses problem a few years down the line.

It is quite clear in the links for those who look.

Incidentally, come the glorious day after the revolution there will be no democracy just a benign dictatorship because as proven the electorate can not be trusted, he'll they voted the Tories in, isn't that enough!

and theres Jeremys plans nailed too.