|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 2, 2023 18:54:09 GMT
From "Get Brexit done!" to "Get Democracy done?!" A bit grand and presumptuous -- and utterly wrong -- elevating Brexit to the level of lofty ideals such as democracy, don't you think? Brexit is not democracy itself. Brexit is an action, a process. Democracy is a principle, an ideal. You conflate the two and confuse one for the other. Only in a Brexit echo chamber can you nurture and sustain that state of confusion. Outside of it? No. Truth and reality will whack you in the head faster than you can say BRINO.  What you don't want to see is fact that pursuing to reverse the undemocratic results of a referendum like Brexit's by means of another referendum is within the parameters of democracy. i havent claimed otherwise. Brexit was a proces in our democracy that remainers lost , and tried to overturn. Thats the point.
the brexit referendum result wasnt undemocratic. not sure what you are saying here.
You hold a vote. You implement the result without the losers squealing . Then you go again . You can in fac hold as many referendums as you like , but for some people too much democracy can be a terrible thing.
So all in all gnome im not sure what the point is of your post and why its aimed at me.
So if Labour win the next GE the Tories have to accept everything they do in silence or they are being undemocratic? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 2, 2023 21:39:49 GMT
Well if they spend the next 4 years refusing to accept that Labour won then yes, it's obviously undemocratic...
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 3, 2023 6:09:01 GMT
i havent claimed otherwise. Brexit was a proces in our democracy that remainers lost , and tried to overturn. Thats the point.
the brexit referendum result wasnt undemocratic. not sure what you are saying here.
You hold a vote. You implement the result without the losers squealing . Then you go again . You can in fac hold as many referendums as you like , but for some people too much democracy can be a terrible thing.
So all in all gnome im not sure what the point is of your post and why its aimed at me.
So if Labour win the next GE the Tories have to accept everything they do in silence or they are being undemocratic? of course not monte , but thats not the comparison is it?
The comparison with what reminers did from 2016 to 2019 would be if labour won the next general election , the tories refusing to accept democracy and demanding labour didnt become the government .
That is what many people , including myself who didnt vote brexit , found completely nauseating reagarding many remainers. Starmer , labour and many remainers tarred themselves ingloriously with the anti democrat brush , and its a stain that is going to take a long time to wash off if ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 3, 2023 6:31:18 GMT
If brexit brought benefit to busin3ss the country would not have the slowest growth in the G7 and forecast to be so in the G20 this year.
From the House of Commons library June 2023
"Compared to the pre-pandemic level, UK GDP in Q1 2023 was 0.5% lower. This compares with Eurozone GDP being 2.2% higher than its pre-pandemic level, while US GDP was 5.6% higher."
As for democracy, there were Tories who were against Brexit andxLabour supporters who approved of it. Labour as a party has NEVER suggested applying for reentry and has said so repeatedly.
There is nothing undemocratic with changing some of the original terms...Boris etc have done so already.
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 3, 2023 6:42:52 GMT
Not if the value of the pounds falls in comparison 5o other currencies so you have to spend more for the same product/raw materials/ wages. The claim that the UK is doing better because the pound value of sales has gone up is a false claim. You have to count the number of cars, not their value. If the UK PLC has increased the value of its sales whilst at the same time reducing the amount of product it needs to make to achieve that increase then that is good news.. No. That is a direct route to reducing the value of the pound and serious inflation. The UK must SPEND internationally as well as internally. If the value of the pound drops you need MORE pounds to buy what used to cost less when the value of the poubd was higher. So all your imports now cost more pounds. If you also cut production you have less potential for sales. Instead you need MORE production to make up the higher number of pounds you now need to buy the same things. If a loaf of bread made from imported wheat costs a pound to make and you had a pound in your pocket which is now worth 75p when the baker tries to import more wheat, he will need to charge you an extra 25p to cover his higher costs due to the lower value of the pound. The result is inflation. The way to strengthen the pound is to make people want to buy it in the currency exchanges because they have faith the economy will be strong via govt plans and investment from inside and outside the UK. That production will improve and that the country will pay off some of its huge debt. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 3, 2023 7:00:32 GMT
If the UK PLC has increased the value of its sales whilst at the same time reducing the amount of product it needs to make to achieve that increase then that is good news.. No. That is a direct route to reducing the value of the pound and serious inflation. The UK must SPEND internationally as well as internally. If the value of the pound drops you need MORE pounds to buy what used to cost less when the value of the poubd was higher. So all your imports now cost more pounds. If you also cut production you have less potential for sales. Instead you need MORE production to make up the higher number of pounds you now need to buy the same things. If a loaf of bread made from imported wheat costs a pound to make and you had a pound in your pocket which is now worth 75p when the baker tries to import more wheat, he will need to charge you an extra 25p to cover his higher costs due to the lower value of the pound. The result is inflation. The way to strengthen the pound is to make people want to buy it in the currency exchanges because they have faith the economy will be strong via govt plans and investment from inside and outside the UK. That production will improve and that the country will pay off some of its huge debt. If you increase the cost of imported items then that makes domestically produced items more attractive. that is precisely why the EU has the largest external tariff barrier around their market - to protect their domestic producers. And why would we want to strengthen the Pound? - prior to Brexit it was overvalued and thus harming domestic manufacturing by making our exports uncompetitive and imports cheaper than they should have been. Germany has done very well with an undervalued currency for the past 3 decades - they certainly do not subscribe to the idea that a strong over valued currency is a status symbol. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jul 3, 2023 8:29:20 GMT
No. That is a direct route to reducing the value of the pound and serious inflation. The UK must SPEND internationally as well as internally. If the value of the pound drops you need MORE pounds to buy what used to cost less when the value of the poubd was higher. So all your imports now cost more pounds. If you also cut production you have less potential for sales. Instead you need MORE production to make up the higher number of pounds you now need to buy the same things. If a loaf of bread made from imported wheat costs a pound to make and you had a pound in your pocket which is now worth 75p when the baker tries to import more wheat, he will need to charge you an extra 25p to cover his higher costs due to the lower value of the pound. The result is inflation. The way to strengthen the pound is to make people want to buy it in the currency exchanges because they have faith the economy will be strong via govt plans and investment from inside and outside the UK. That production will improve and that the country will pay off some of its huge debt. If you increase the cost of imported items then that makes domestically produced items more attractive. that is precisely why the EU has the largest external tariff barrier around their market - to protect their domestic producers. And why would we want to strengthen the Pound? - prior to Brexit it was overvalued and thus harming domestic manufacturing by making our exports uncompetitive and imports cheaper than they should have been. Germany has done very well with an undervalued currency for the past 3 decades - they certainly do not subscribe to the idea that a strong over valued currency is a status symbol. Spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 3, 2023 8:51:34 GMT
www.reuters.com/markets/europe/germany-enters-recession-2023-05-25/Germany's recession is explained here. But the value of the mark remains steady. A fall in consumer spending may well be 5he result of higher interest rates, something the UK government wants in order to stop inflation. However it is still thmrue that the fall in the value of a currency like the pound means you have to increase production to maintain the same purchasing power. It is a fundamental economic fact that meant the awful economic situation in the Weimar republic of the loss of value of the mark which caused inflation which made the mark worth even less. You want to strengthen the pound so that each one is worth more. THEN you can slow production if all you want is to stand still.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jul 3, 2023 9:11:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 3, 2023 10:40:20 GMT
So if Labour win the next GE the Tories have to accept everything they do in silence or they are being undemocratic? of course not monte , but thats not the comparison is it?
The comparison with what reminers did from 2016 to 2019 would be if labour won the next general election , the tories refusing to accept democracy and demanding labour didnt become the government .
That is what many people , including myself who didnt vote brexit , found completely nauseating reagarding many remainers. Starmer , labour and many remainers tarred themselves ingloriously with the anti democrat brush , and its a stain that is going to take a long time to wash off if ever.
Is this why you stopped arguing for Scottish Independence after the Indy Ref? The way you just quietly accepted the result of the vote should be an example to us all. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 3, 2023 12:03:26 GMT
www.reuters.com/markets/europe/germany-enters-recession-2023-05-25/Germany's recession is explained here. But the value of the mark remains steady. A fall in consumer spending may well be 5he result of higher interest rates, something the UK government wants in order to stop inflation. However it is still thmrue that the fall in the value of a currency like the pound means you have to increase production to maintain the same purchasing power. It is a fundamental economic fact that meant the awful economic situation in the Weimar republic of the loss of value of the mark which caused inflation which made the mark worth even less. You want to strengthen the pound so that each one is worth more. THEN you can slow production if all you want is to stand still. If you go back to an overvalued pound then you would export less as your goods would be more expensive. Although I can understand why someone in France wants to hobble the UK economy - you obviously dont want the competition which is fair enough. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 3, 2023 13:11:40 GMT
Oh stop it.
The value of a currency is deecided by international currency exchanges and the stock/bond/gilt markets.
Not the government or The Bank of England which has some manoeuvering room but always has to work in context with other currencies.for example if the euro goes up, the pound goes down BY COMPARISON.
Being a largely importing nation, it is better to have a stronger pound so tthat it takes a smaller production to make the value.
The balancing between the strength of the currency and what it will trade for relative to everyone else is what hedging and futures are about. They gamble and buy into future values of various currencies.
Of course overvalued currency may make your goods more expensive and v v. The trick is to let the markets decide since that is where the values are established.
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 3, 2023 13:14:10 GMT
Dont be an ass. Covid and Ukraine sorted it. Brexit had a comparatively small part in it. Though it didnt help. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 3, 2023 13:40:14 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2023 14:01:34 GMT
From "Get Brexit done!" to "Get Democracy done?!" A bit grand and presumptuous -- and utterly wrong -- elevating Brexit to the level of lofty ideals such as democracy, don't you think? Brexit is not democracy itself. Brexit is an action, a process. Democracy is a principle, an ideal. You conflate the two and confuse one for the other. Only in a Brexit echo chamber can you nurture and sustain that state of confusion. Outside of it? No. Truth and reality will whack you in the head faster than you can say BRINO. What you don't want to see is fact that pursuing to reverse the undemocratic results of a referendum like Brexit's by means of another referendum is within the parameters of democracy. i havent claimed otherwise. Brexit was a proces in our democracy that remainers lost , and tried to overturn. Thats the point.
the brexit referendum result wasnt undemocratic. not sure what you are saying here.
You hold a vote. You implement the result without the losers squealing . Then you go again . You can in fac hold as many referendums as you like , but for some people too much democracy can be a terrible thing.
So all in all gnome im not sure what the point is of your post and why its aimed at me.
No intention of sounding accusatory or belligerent here. Neither do I have any wish to go back to 2016. However, when it is called for, we must drive home the point that overturning an undemocratic referendum by way of another referendum is, per se, a democratic process. It is not in conflict with democracy. What's wrong is the claim that such a process equates to killing off democracy or that those who wish to carry out such a process are undemocratic. 2016 was corrupted; hence, undemocratic. A democratic referendum is that which is free of illegalities, corruption, cheating and such things. If it is found to be otherwise, then the referendum must be rerun. The only thing that saved 2016 from being rerun was the fact that it was advisory and did not have legal standing. The courts could not void the results. These ^ two points must be reiterated, driven home, emphasised, reinforced whatever; otherwise, they will be buried under tons of disinformation. |
|
