Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 14:05:05 GMT
It suggests that the more thoughtful, less easily fooled ones were more likely to think Brexit was a bad idea. And it seems to me that being more intelligent and thoughtful on average and less easily fooled by any old shit, they are more likely to have been right. It doesnt guarantee this to be so, but it is more evidence that we got what the stupid people wanted and the intelligent ones didnt. This is just more evidence that Brexit was always likely to be a bad idea, sold on the basis of bullshit. But it doesnt really matter now. Time will tell its own story in the end. So let us see what transpires over the next few years. This seems more pertinent as the EU bureaucracy requires vast numbers of people feeding information and research into it and ensures our money is there for that. FOM of course works to the disadvantage of the blue collar worker who finds that not only is his job now available to many millions more people but that very expansion of the labour market has driven wages down at his end of the market. It does not take much intelligence to see that is certainly a very big factor. There is also the fact that with the lower end labour the services at the lower end become more stretched and the communities more overwhelmed. It may be nice for a scientist to rough it and visit a Polish supermarket and immerse himself momentarily in the great multicultural event, it is a little more overpowering for the people whose local supermarket is now effectively a foreign country. That is a legitimate point so you could be right about that. For example, it was mostly the working classes who were being economically disadvantaged by the systematic exploitation of cheap foreign Labour whilst the often better educated affluent middle classes were more likely to be the beneficiaries of it, and all too happy to dismiss the working classes as racists. I saw such attitudes myself in the Labour party when I was a member. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 14:07:21 GMT
What has changed, that has accelerated divisions and thrown them into sharp relief, is access to knowledge. Prior to the internet age, knowledge was collated, curated and verified and the sources of that knowledge could be authenticated. Since the rise of social media, knowledge is universally accessible but it is no longer collated, curated and verifiable. In particular I think that the internet has allowed the deliberate dissemination of disinformation around the world. And some of this nonsense becomes accepted reality before anyone has had a chance to refute it - and it then becomes irrefutable. The CO2 climate change theory is an obvious one, which is probably an early example of "non-fatal warfare". The elimination of CO2 is a very easy way to impoverish the developed nations and destroy the capitalist system. It's a case of very clever disinformation. Yet you yourself are the clearest example on this forum of the very phenomenon you describe without realising it. |
|
|
|
Post by Cartertonian on Nov 26, 2023 14:09:51 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 14:24:31 GMT
The evidence I posted clearly suggests that on average Brexiteers are less intelligent and thus more easily fooled than Remainers. Simply pretending that is not the case without counter evidence to support you cuts no ice with me. And I am sufficiently clued up about economics, thank you very much. My disagreeing with you does not constitute evidence to the contrary.Let's have a little history lesson and go back to when we joined the Common Market. There was a good reason to join this trading body because, back then, tariffs were very high so it made some sense to pay to join the Common Market. Although why we should pay for "free" trade I've never understood. Even so there were some big dangers in free trade with Europe because we exposed our industry to the likes of Germany and we lost out badly - all our car industry has gone for example. However, over the years, world tariffs have plummeted while our "budget contribution" to the EU has soared. We were paying more to be a member of the free trade club than we would have paid in tariffs. Which makes no sense. We had also given away our sovereignty (Maastricht) and our fishing waters (for nothing in return) and had virtually no say in any of the decision making because our vote numbers had been eroded. And also the trade we do with the EU has been gradually dropping as Europe goes into decline and India and China are the growing markets. Also by being in the protectionist Customs Union it meant that we had to raise high tariff barriers against non-EU members - so it was uneconomic to trade with the Commonwealth. Basically membership of the EU made no sense whatsoever for us. And Jean-Claude Juncker himself admitted this! So what do you think is going to happen in the future that will suddenly make it economically advantageous to rejoin the EU? It's got to be something pretty massive. Come on - give us the benefit of your economic knowledge, srb. Nonsense. It is a well known fact of economics that the less restricted the trade, and the fewer the obstacles there are to the free movement of goods and services, the more standardisation in terms of rules and regulations, the simpler it is to trade internationally, the more prosperous societies will tend to be. Which is why a single market for goods and services with rules that are the same for everyone in it will - all other things being equal - tend to increase trade and prosperity for all. I am surprised that with your claims to economic knowledge you fail to understand this. Free movement of people is more of a mixed blessing, with obvious downsides. When all nations are similarly prosperous, the benefits of free movement of people within an economic area far outweigh the disadvantages, with talent going where it is most needed and boosting the overall economic performance. But where there is a vast disparity between rich nations and poor nations, as there was with the accession of much of Eastern Europe, what tends to happen is that workers from the poorer nations flock to the richer ones, depressing pay and increasing housing costs in the richer ones, whilst conditions in the poorer ones get better. Eventually it would even out, but at the expense of workers in the richer nations getting poorer whilst those in the poorer ones get richer. As one of those richer nations, free movement of people from poorer ones was systematically disadvantaging millions of British workers, which drove them in the end into the arms of UKIP. Most richer nations recognised the inherent problems of this, and put in place transitional arrangements, but New Labour just opened our borders, happy to help the poor of other nations at the cost of disadvantaging our own, whom they were beginning to harbour growing contempt for anyway. And inevitably this cost them the support of much of their former working class base. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 26, 2023 14:31:39 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 14:33:34 GMT
It suggests that the more thoughtful, less easily fooled ones were more likely to think Brexit was a bad idea. And it seems to me that being more intelligent and thoughtful on average and less easily fooled by any old shit, they are more likely to have been right. It doesnt guarantee this to be so, but it is more evidence that we got what the stupid people wanted and the intelligent ones didnt. This is just more evidence that Brexit was always likely to be a bad idea, sold on the basis of bullshit. But it doesnt really matter now. Time will tell its own story in the end. So let us see what transpires over the next few years.
There were intelligent arguments on both sides and foolish arguments on both sides, you were conned into believing the foolish project fear arguments. And all your posts on the EU are rather ignorant and childish. I get that you like the idea of multinational cooperation (most here do), but there are better ways than the EU. Over and over and over again sovereign powers were handed to the EU without a vote by politicians who thought they knew best. Well they didn't know best. The same moron (John Major) who signed the Maastricht Treaty and took us into the EU took us into the ERM and plunged us into recession. The same moron who signed the Amsterdam and Nice Treaties believed lies about WMDs and took us into the Iraq war, a war which cost over 290 thousand lives. Intelligent? Not at all. The same moron who signed the Lisbon Treaty without a referendum was warned over and over to give us a referendum. He called people concerned about immigration "bigots", he then instead of owning his words and sticking to principles tried a mealy mouthed apology, grovelling for votes. Major, Blair and Brown by treaty, signed away sovereign powers to the Commission without our consent. Doing that signs away the power of the voters to change policy. After all, how can voters change a policy if it is in a treaty? The only way is to come out of that treaty. Going back would mean handing even more sovereign powers to the EU, the power of border control, the power over our currency to set interest rates, to control inflation. We would become even more of a vassal state than we were last time we were in. EU membership didn't work for us. Even the most Europhilic of intelligent people recognised the thing needed serious reforms and hadn't received reforms. Juncker flat refused. It's incredibly stupid to not recognise the political, social and economic problems that existed when we were in. Politically, we were a vassal state, a rule taker without any control at the ballot box, of EU policy. Socially, food banks, high rates of homelessness (a lot of whom were failed EU economic migrants), these are not a good sign. Economically, even Ford had stopped vehicle production in our country. The overvalued pound was seriously harming our exports. We've fixed that now. Bollocks from you I say in response. And the food banks have far more to do with our own governments policies than with the EU. Otherwise there would be foodbanks throughout the EU. No, that problem has been home grown. It began in the New Labour years, revealingly when the drive to get tough on welfare claimant began in earnest with withdrawal of all benefits for a period. Apparently, no one realised the obvious that having no money to buy food for a month or two was going to result in people starving to death unless charities stepped in. Of course as the Tories came in and got much tougher as well as carrying through a self defeating and economically destructive austerity program, food banks multiplied exponentially. Food banks are not the fault of the EU but of our own governments. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 14:48:47 GMT
The increased bureaucracy, delays, and red tape on the borders serve the same purpose as tariffs, by increasing the costs of trade. And tariff free trade is no longer automatic but comes with whole heaps of hoops that have to be jumped through, involving proving that goods being exported into the EU comply with EU standards and conform to point of origin rules and suchlike. The supposed absence of tariffs only comes at great additional cost. Some exporters simply find it less costly and less hassle just to pay the frigging tariffs anyway. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57282379 |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 26, 2023 15:10:47 GMT
I hate to draw on grand narratives, because grand narratives are just the sort of things that can be used to manipulate people.
However, I think one grand narrative deserves a little attention and is harmless (liberating).
The internet is making us (more like) one personality - or to put it somewhat less dramatically, we are all now in a relationship that we weren't in before the internet.
We are being encouraged (by narcissists and through that relationship) to engage in a shared fantasy. The stakes could not be higher (for them). They have to get us to invest or they turn into nothing.
For some background - this guy is pretty reliably on point and doesn't waste your time
Perhaps the real issue of our age?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Nov 26, 2023 15:36:30 GMT
The increased bureaucracy, delays, and red tape on the borders serve the same purpose as tariffs, by increasing the costs of trade. And tariff free trade is no longer automatic but comes with whole heaps of hoops that have to be jumped through, involving proving that goods being exported into the EU comply with EU standards and conform to point of origin rules and suchlike. The supposed absence of tariffs only comes at great additional cost. Some exporters simply find it less costly and less hassle just to pay the frigging tariffs anyway. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57282379Any inconveniences to you are minor inconveniences that don't matter.
The benefits are greater volume of exports, more free trade deals, a currency which is no longer overvalued and causing our exports to suffer from being too expensive, lower unemployment, fairer immigration rules.
More skilled economic immigrants, fewer unskilled economic immigrants.
Only person on here complaining about the UK letting non EU immigrants in, is a certain ex pat, who supported membership of the EU, so he could use free movement to go between white countries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Nov 26, 2023 15:49:37 GMT
Prejudiced bollocks.
There were intelligent arguments on both sides and foolish arguments on both sides, you were conned into believing the foolish project fear arguments. And all your posts on the EU are rather ignorant and childish. I get that you like the idea of multinational cooperation (most here do), but there are better ways than the EU. Over and over and over again sovereign powers were handed to the EU without a vote by politicians who thought they knew best. Well they didn't know best. The same moron (John Major) who signed the Maastricht Treaty and took us into the EU took us into the ERM and plunged us into recession. The same moron who signed the Amsterdam and Nice Treaties believed lies about WMDs and took us into the Iraq war, a war which cost over 290 thousand lives. Intelligent? Not at all. The same moron who signed the Lisbon Treaty without a referendum was warned over and over to give us a referendum. He called people concerned about immigration "bigots", he then instead of owning his words and sticking to principles tried a mealy mouthed apology, grovelling for votes. Major, Blair and Brown by treaty, signed away sovereign powers to the Commission without our consent. Doing that signs away the power of the voters to change policy. After all, how can voters change a policy if it is in a treaty? The only way is to come out of that treaty. Going back would mean handing even more sovereign powers to the EU, the power of border control, the power over our currency to set interest rates, to control inflation. We would become even more of a vassal state than we were last time we were in. EU membership didn't work for us. Even the most Europhilic of intelligent people recognised the thing needed serious reforms and hadn't received reforms. Juncker flat refused. It's incredibly stupid to not recognise the political, social and economic problems that existed when we were in. Politically, we were a vassal state, a rule taker without any control at the ballot box, of EU policy. Socially, food banks, high rates of homelessness (a lot of whom were failed EU economic migrants), these are not a good sign. Economically, even Ford had stopped vehicle production in our country. The overvalued pound was seriously harming our exports. We've fixed that now. Bollocks from you I say in response. And the food banks have far more to do with our own governments policies than with the EU. Otherwise there would be foodbanks throughout the EU. There are. 3.5 million depend on food banks in France. 2 million Germans depend on Tafel food banks in Germany. There were already eight thousand food bank dependent Dutch households by 2006. The demand has grown there. Still blaming everything on the Tories? The first British food bank opened in 2000, at the height of Blairism. There's a large number of food banks in Poland. aktywniobywatele.org.pl/en/projekty/the-federation-of-polish-food-banks/All across the EU there are food banks.
Stop pretending that everything would have been wonderful had we stayed.
The EU is a failing project.
It has free movement of poverty.
Free movement of debt.
Free movement of crime.
It does not have wage parity.
It does not have cost of living parity.
People from very poor countries are moving to richer ones and failing.
The EU lacks the democratic institutions necessary to be able to provide parity of living.
It does however facilitate crony capitalism.
Poverty exploitation.
Businesses ditching high wage economies for low wage economies.
It does not work.
It desperately needs reform and has not been reformed.
We were told simultaneously that the EU had been reformed and paradoxically that it needed reform.
There is a reason we voted leave and it isn't because we're stupid racists, or stupid non racists.
It's because the EU doesn't work, can't be reformed and was costing us £9.5 billion a year for membership of an organisation that controlled our laws and wouldn't let us make our own free trade agreements.
Membership was a complete and utter failure.
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Nov 26, 2023 16:56:47 GMT
It is actual to us. We can observe other species from within our own "reality" but we will never understand the reality any other living thing experiences. I have no idea what an octopus' reality is, or a bird's. We can only guess based on OUR reality. Yes, I understand that but that doesn't mean our reality is "mass delusion". I didnt say it was. I merely pointed out that there are many alternate realities. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Nov 26, 2023 17:02:34 GMT
Vinny says "Major, Blair and Brown by treaty, signed away sovereign powers to the Commission without our consent." Bollox. You have rhe right to vote for your MEP. The elected government in your country assigns them to EU parties. These parties vote in or reject proposed EU legislation. This vote then goes to the Council, 27 elected leaders of their countries. Proposed legislation also must be approved by individual members" elected parliament. Tha means all legislation has to be passed by THREE democratically elected bodies. Finally each member has the right to opt out of the legislation. Vinny is suffering from far too much kool aid. Exactly what sovereign powers did the UK sign away? What about the laws, the regulations, the direction of travel and the general outlook of the EEC before some form of democracy was in place. We are left with a fait accompli that is both difficult to change and resistant to change. Why are you trying to divert to 70 year old history? I am certainly not going to discuss the past. And the fact that we have what we have now is proof that things can change. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 26, 2023 17:08:53 GMT
What about the laws, the regulations, the direction of travel and the general outlook of the EEC before some form of democracy was in place. We are left with a fait accompli that is both difficult to change and resistant to change. Why are you trying to divert to 70 year old history? I am certainly not going to discuss the past. And the fact that we have what we have now is proof that things can change. Of course you won't because how it was born lies in the undemocratic past and the ability to change any of that exists in the parts in the here and now that are undemocratic. FOM for example cannot be changed as it lies at the heart of what the EU is. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Nov 26, 2023 17:09:01 GMT
The increased bureaucracy, delays, and red tape on the borders serve the same purpose as tariffs, by increasing the costs of trade. And tariff free trade is no longer automatic but comes with whole heaps of hoops that have to be jumped through, involving proving that goods being exported into the EU comply with EU standards and conform to point of origin rules and suchlike. The supposed absence of tariffs only comes at great additional cost. Some exporters simply find it less costly and less hassle just to pay the frigging tariffs anyway. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57282379Perhaps Vinny would care to explain how the UK has a FTA with the EU and yet still pays customs duties and why many EU products are not allowed to be sold in the UK. And what is the difference between customs duties and tarrifs. He seems a bit confused. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Nov 26, 2023 17:16:03 GMT
Why are you trying to divert to 70 year old history? I am certainly not going to discuss the past. And the fact that we have what we have now is proof that things can change. Of course you won't because how it was born lies in the undemocratic past and the ability to change any of that exists in the parts in the here and now that are undemocratic. FOM for example cannot be changed as it lies at the heart of what the EU is. If a majority of members want to change it, they can. And in fact there have been instances when members have closed their borders, one being during Covid. They didnt need approval from the EU. They are free to do so as they wish. Security in requests from Interpol also close borders. They can also close airspace at will, as has happened recently during ATC strikes. You do have a tortured, uneducated concept of the EU. |
|
