paulfish4570
Veteran
hilarious, Valdas, on the bernie thing ... 🙂
BREXIT: UK members might want to consider GAS before the June 23 referendum
- Thread starter lynnb
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 505
- Views 38K
- Status
Wulfthari
Well-known
paulfish4570
Veteran
bwahahahahahahahahaha! ^
user237428934
User deletion pending
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Mike,
I by no means am saying that Americans or the U.S. are any better: I know we are part of the problem and can take some blame for having created many of them. My appologies to the world for for the suffering that has been created by my government.
What I report is not an invention. Many Russian Rubles and Chinese Yuan have bought Dollars and Pounds to buy luxury real estate where ownership is some LLC so ownership can not be traced or confiscated by foreign governments. There are entire blocks on the Upper East Side on or near 5th Avenue where people only live there for 3 months of a year. Now 57th Street is called Billionaire's Row where the tallest residential building in North America presides.
There are certain cities in the world beside London and NYC like Zurich and Monaco that allow/condone this bunkering that I speak of. All of these places are financial/banking centers where governments make it easy for people to hide wealth.
Stability is relative. I agree that the U.S. Dollar can not count on being a reserve currency indefinitely during a time of currency wars. New York City, a city of immigrants where 200 languages are spoken, happens to be one of the safest cities in the world. London is also a very safe city. The U.S. surely has a debt problem, yet our debt to GNP ratio is still better than say Japan.
Check out the ultra luxury housing markets in London and NYC. My statement is not bold at all it is just connecting the dots. What would you do if you were a billionaire from an unstable country? What would you do to preserve your wealth? What cities would allow you to maintain your prosperity? What countries have the military to protect your interests and assets?
Recently my girlfriend who is a fashion blogger was interviewed and videotaped in a 58.5 million dollar penthouse that had about 7600 interior square feet and about 3000 square feet of terrace that had unobstructed views of midtown Madhattan. Anyways it was obscene.
The complexity involved muddles understanding. I am greatful for the engagement. One thing to add to the discussion is that a growing population is necessary to have an expanding economy. Here in the U.S. we do not have a sustainable birth rate, and immigration has allowed our population to grow to be the third most populated country in the world.
Europe, the U.S. and Japan all have aging populations, so important economic demographics that effect productivity, GNP, and consumerism are all profoundly effected by the above demographic. I know that immigration is the key that makes NYC great. Without immigration and with a negative reproduction rate below 2.0 how will we sustain our countries without immigration?
Another thing to consider that might be a bad example is NAFTA that made Canada and Mexico the biggest trading partners with the U.S. Perhaps a much simpler and less complicated than the E.U. but on the scale of a continent. Mexico became the 11th largest economy in the world by some reports with an economy that now is larger than France.
If Trump gets elected, and if he is able to build his "wall" it is ironic that it would prevent the reverse migration that has been happening since the credit crisis where Mexicans that were illegals in the U.S. have returned to Mexico for better opportunities in their home country.
Also want to say that many immigrants and particularly illegal immigrants perform the jobs that Americans don't want. This is not to say or denigh that NAFTA exported manufacturing jobs and helped dissolve the power of unions.
Cal
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Now that is a very embarrassing confession regarding the decision-making process within the Tories...
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Hey, Cal, stop bringing facts and logic into it. Too many people are unable to handle either.
Others of us greatly admire the way you have told the truth in this thread but I fear it will not convert many. Do you know the old saying, "My mind is made up. Do not confuse me with the facts."
Cheers,
R.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
W,
I recently read James A. Mitchner's historical novel titled "Poland."
Let's not forget the Teutonic Knights. Poland was invaded and conquered even though they were already firmly a Christian country. That is part of the 500 years of religious wars if you count part of Eastern Europe (Poland).
Cal
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Cal,
Then again, Christians fighting wholesale religious wars against other Christians is not that unusual. Have you ever been to Cathar country? Many of them are pretty weird to this day, despite the Albigensian Crusade. If you haven't already read it, you might find Montaillou interesting: an account of a Cathar village from 1294 to 1394: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Le_Roy_Ladurie#Montaillou
Cheers,
R.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Roger,
This is a complicated thread. I really wish for some understanding so we might make the best decisions. The world is not that big. Anyways no clear decision with an all good outcome. I am trying to understand both sides, and that's where it all gets complicated.
In a way the E.U. is like the Federal Government in the U.S.: nobody likes Washington; their rules; their regulations; and their medling; but together the E.U. economically has a GDP bigger than the U.S.
Anyways something to support the E.U. is for military defense if Trump gets elected. Pretty much Europe might have to defend itself.
Anyways all the differences in countries and people I look upon as a good thing, but first hand I know it is not easy. It has the potential to be both good and bad.
More facts: Britain is 1/6th of the E.U. economy and 3% of global GDP.
Cal
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
And British doctors, dentists and nurses go to the USA and so on. I reckon that the only way to stop immigration is to ban emigration.
Regards, David
valdas
Veteran
yes, you see - that's the whole issue with bringing the migration argument
on the Brexit debate table... it's simply ridiculous
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
My 3-year-old daughter, who is good at committing to memory phrases like "this [family] is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship," (I guess with her in command...) refuses to say the word "Brexit." So my prediction is a no vote.
But the debate (in general) is one of the least intellectually rigorous exercises I've seen in a long time: xenophobes on one side and name-callers on the other. I don't see much but fear-mongering all around. The Brexiters seem to be infected with a fear of some "foreign" takeover. The Stayers are pushing fear (and implicitly promising EU retribution) if the UK exercises even a token amount of self-determination (is the referendum even binding?).
From my observation, if the UK is already not in the Euro zone, then there is nothing else that cannot be solved by bilateral or multilateral treaties. That's how it works with Canada, the U.S., and Mexico with NAFTA - and it's how the US negotiates with Europe. Between developed countries, tariffs are actually pretty low. EU statistics put the average US-EU tariff at 3% (source), which is not exactly staggering except for the most thinly profitable industries (the reasons why autos are balking is that they operate on razor thin margins). Non-tariff barriers are a much bigger problem. So what is the EU saying? That it will cut the UK a worse deal than the US? That it will erect NTBs to hinder trade with Europe?
I'm sure you will find that the larger concerns are more concerned with their access to markets than they are with the EU itself. When push comes to shove, JLR is likely lobbying its workers to protect its own economic interests, which are more certain if the UK stays than if it goes. But if it goes, large business concerns both in the EU and UK will push for bilateral free trade.
Dante
P.S. Maybe Brexiters have internalized Orwell's prediction of an Oceania, Eurasia, and East Asia.
But the debate (in general) is one of the least intellectually rigorous exercises I've seen in a long time: xenophobes on one side and name-callers on the other. I don't see much but fear-mongering all around. The Brexiters seem to be infected with a fear of some "foreign" takeover. The Stayers are pushing fear (and implicitly promising EU retribution) if the UK exercises even a token amount of self-determination (is the referendum even binding?).
From my observation, if the UK is already not in the Euro zone, then there is nothing else that cannot be solved by bilateral or multilateral treaties. That's how it works with Canada, the U.S., and Mexico with NAFTA - and it's how the US negotiates with Europe. Between developed countries, tariffs are actually pretty low. EU statistics put the average US-EU tariff at 3% (source), which is not exactly staggering except for the most thinly profitable industries (the reasons why autos are balking is that they operate on razor thin margins). Non-tariff barriers are a much bigger problem. So what is the EU saying? That it will cut the UK a worse deal than the US? That it will erect NTBs to hinder trade with Europe?
I'm sure you will find that the larger concerns are more concerned with their access to markets than they are with the EU itself. When push comes to shove, JLR is likely lobbying its workers to protect its own economic interests, which are more certain if the UK stays than if it goes. But if it goes, large business concerns both in the EU and UK will push for bilateral free trade.
Dante
P.S. Maybe Brexiters have internalized Orwell's prediction of an Oceania, Eurasia, and East Asia.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
David,
I work in a rather famous NYC hospital where a lot of medical research is performed (Cancer). We get all the "Post Docs," PhD's from all over the world who perform their training and gain their first work experience.
Basically these PhD's are the brightest and the best from all over the world, but they are kinda slaved. Post Docs are expected to work long hours and are paid so little that housing has to be supplied, so the busness model is very much like "share cropping" post Civil War.
Anyways I just want to let you know that this is a very oppressive system.
Also know that professionals protect their professions and things like medical licenses are not transferable. One of my ex co-workers (retired) was a medical doctor in China, but here in the U.S. she was only a research technician. Professonal licenses are not transferable and are strongly protected by license holders for their own best interests.
Also know that here in the U.S. all these highly educated people are not welcomed and many/most have problems remaining.
Cal
Gid
Well-known
Here are some links -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0877e678-2783-11d9-a0dd-00000e2511c8.html#axzz4CK1IrHmu
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rance-and-Germany-keep-breaking-EU-rules.html
There are lots more links if you Google "EU fiscal rules relaxation for Germany"
Finally a link to the largest net contributors (absolute not per capita) for 2013 where the UK is second to Germany. I'm sure this is a moveable feast and will change from year to year.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...w-much-does-Britain-pay-to-the-EU-budget.html
Last edited:
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Yes. However, VAT is applicable, around 20%. Worse than the markup is that you have to show up in the customs office (in my case two hours ride across town) for personal pickup and payment within a week or the items will be destroyed. I had to quit purchasing from Switzerland and the US once the German customs discovered the Internet - and the same will doubtlessly extend to the UK if they drop out of the common VAT zone. That is, while the big corporations will doubtlessly find ways around their trade impediments (and if they move EU production to some site in the EU), it will be a considerable nuisance for smaller businesses, down to the scale of most specialist photo equipment sellers or even Ilford.
Out to Lunch
Veteran
The photography content of this thread has been underwhelming.
Emotions rather than fact tend to drive these debates, which is also the main reason why Brexit should not have been put to a referendum in the first place: the complexity of 'in' or 'out' cannot be captured in a simple 'yes' or 'no' vote.
Emotions rather than fact tend to drive these debates, which is also the main reason why Brexit should not have been put to a referendum in the first place: the complexity of 'in' or 'out' cannot be captured in a simple 'yes' or 'no' vote.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
No, Sadly, the leaders in both sides of the debate show little sign of driving such a change. Hence, in part, my preference for in as a constraint on the more neoliberal approaches of the current government and orthodoxy.
However, the 'leavers' are worse. Their own, single, economist who produced very flawed calculations predicting increased growth has to acknowledge that this would be at the expense of even greater inequality and the end of what manufacturing we have left. That's ignoring his out of date and flawed underlying assumptions in the first place.
There is some resurgence of the left, which may lead to a willingness to start to address the issues, but in today's world I think that can only be done in a concerted fashion from within the EU. Likewise, the many serious issues we face across the world are, in my view, best addressed together and will require governments to act in concert if they are to have any chance of being effective.
Mike
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Peter,
Quite. As Clement Attlee put it in 1945, "I could not consent to the introduction into our national life of a device so alien to all our traditions as the referendum, which has only too often been the instrument of Nazism and fascism.” (see http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/21/brexit-euroscepticism-history )
But here's a directly photographic point: rules on the shipping of developers. Tariffs are pretty irrelevant: it's standards that matter, including things like permitted developer contents and concentrations for shipping. It's not that wicked, evil Brussels imposes such standards. Rather, it's a matter of making sure you can sell your products anywhere. The fewer players you have to please, the easier it is to meet those standards; and the bigger the players, the easier it is to lean on nations who don't really give a stuff about the environment, human health, workers' hours..
Brexiteers imagine we can do away with such standards. We can't.
Cheers,
R.
user237428934
User deletion pending
That calculation of the net contribution is stupid in my eyes. According to that, Germany only gets back half of what it pays in. We would be stupid if we did this on a long term. What's not in the calculation is the amount we get back inderectly (market access -> export -> taxes and jobs; access to skilled workers who come to Germany). Of course it's hard to calculate but I'm sure in the end our county gets more out than it puts in.
But now we are inmidst of juggling with figures that you can either use for the stay- or equally for the leave-campaigners.
How ever you guys in GB decide, you end with a torn apart country (should it end almost 50:50).
This whole discussion is fuelled mainly by nationalism. A strong wind of rising nationalism blows over Europe. That's not a good thing. This pure egoism of countries brought us some ugly conflicts in the last couple of hundred years.
- Status