This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| Hoof Hearted 16 Jun 16 11.22am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
Are you being Served With Notice to Quit? Curb Your EUthusiam? Only Fools and Economists Mind Your Language The Imam of Dibley Dads Polish Army
|
|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
I think we have a consensus of opinion that any form of uncertainty will lead to the economy suffering. Remaining in the EU is just a big an issue as coming out. Wing and a prayer...... LOL... behave yourself.... you're frightening the kids and simple minded. Mentioning Japan.... are we to expect a Tsunami too Kermit? Edited by Hoof Hearted (16 Jun 2016 11.15am)
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Jun 16 11.31am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Well done Sadly not all of us are IFAs, so most of us won't have protected our pensions as you have. For skilled jobs of the type you and I would look at immigration from the EU is far less of a risk than immigration from Asian tiger economies or indeed from the US - I don't compete at all with other EU nationals. Therefore my point stands. It isn't in the interests of many older people to vote exit as any benefits will come too late for them and in the meanwhile they will have to handle the disbenefits - potentially for the rest of their lives. I don't believe I said 'Remain is the best option'. What I said is that demographically its odd to see turkeys voting for Christmas. Maybe it is unselfish of them to do that. They are convinced they are giving a legacy to the next generation despite the obvious draw-backs for themselves. In which case I can simply remark what a kind generation we belong to. Most pensioners are in defined benefit schemes (certainly this is true of the public sector) and will have retired or have guaranteed benefits, so your point doesn't stand for the majority. The market correction would be minimal and short term anyway. Anyone investing in a private pension on a monthly basis will be buying cheap units right now and will see a big rise in value when the market picks up again.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Jun 16 11.33am | |
|---|---|
|
Just as likely that we'll be hit by a huge meteor or comet from outer space.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Most pensioners are in defined benefit schemes (certainly this is true of the public sector) and will have retired or have guaranteed benefits, so your point doesn't stand for the majority. The market correction would be minimal and short term anyway. Anyone investing in a private pension on a monthly basis will be buying cheap units right now and will see a big rise in value when the market picks up again. I would like to see your source on that. You are missing my point though. Even those with DB schemes are likely to have other investments that produce income for them. And those investments are being hit by the immediate risk of a possible Brexit and the hiatus that would cause. And if Brexit happens will continue to be hit until a new equilibrium is reached. The concept that the risk of Remain is just as high is clearly bananas, just follow the Stock Market and you will see that. And the idea that the chaos will be 'minimal and short-term' is also madness, how long do people think it will take to renegotiate all of the trade deals for a start. Take an economic shock and the set-back in terms of knock-on effects of under-investment can last a generation, as in Japan. And since you raise it, housing. The older generation owns housing and benefits from its inflated price, whether or not that is driven by our EU membership. If it's true leaving frees up housing stock, again it's the older generation that will subsidise the future of the younger generation by a lessening in the value of their properties. So, like I said above, it is very kind of the older generation to forego a significant proportion of their wealth for the future of the younger generation. Let's hope the benefits they anticipate coming eventually from Brexit do in fact materialise or all of their sacrifice will come to naught. Good on them is all I can say, clearly they know what they are doing when they vote.
|
|
|
Originally posted by DanH
Kinda agree but too be fair they're have been an overwhelming majority of people who Know What They Are Talking About backing remain over leave. I'm not disputing that. And if you're for Remain, fair enough. As long as you've bothered to think about it and make your own mind up. If you can't be bothered to do that, and would rather outsource your thinking to people who (claim to) Know What They Are Talking About then, sorry, you don't deserve a vote. It's like the Glastonbury thing. 'Ooh, might vote, but not if it clashes with Glastonbury.' If you're that stupid and superficial, then don't moan when those with the power screw you over. Actually, my rant is less about 'Remain' than the referendum in general. It's an outrage that it's even being held.
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
|
After Cameron made that ridiculous Churchill speech, in a fit of anger I bunged 100€ on 'Bremain' to get over 55%. Just so I could tolerate his smug, pink, charlatan face when he scrapes through once again. After all these headlines about 'Leave' gaining in the polls, I have started to worry about my cash. So I checked out the polls ahead of the Scottish referendum. In the final month of campaigning, the average lead for remain was 4% (eg, 49% remain, 45% independence, 6% undecided) The average difference (both median and mean) was a 4% lead for Remain (n=23). The highest lead was 7% (on 12th September) The final result was a 10.6% lead for Remain. That was 6.6% more than the average and 3.6% more than the highest poll figure. In short, I think my money's safe. It will be over 55% Remain. You heard it here first. Source: [Link]
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
|
Originally posted by Johnny Eagles
I'm not disputing that. And if you're for Remain, fair enough. As long as you've bothered to think about it and make your own mind up. If you can't be bothered to do that, and would rather outsource your thinking to people who (claim to) Know What They Are Talking About then, sorry, you don't deserve a vote. It's like the Glastonbury thing. 'Ooh, might vote, but not if it clashes with Glastonbury.' If you're that stupid and superficial, then don't moan when those with the power screw you over. Actually, my rant is less about 'Remain' than the referendum in general. It's an outrage that it's even being held. Yeah who needs a proper democracy eh If people can't be bothered to get properly informed then they shouldn't be able to vote. But then problem is that even people who can be bothered to get properly informed find the "evidence" so tainted by whatever their initial bias is that it is meaningless.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
Really? I'd imagine plenty of those voting Leave are doing so solely because of immigration, and have little or no understanding of the likely consequences, economic or otherwise. Certainly some I know. You could get the Queen, the Pope and Bob Geldof to swear that an Out vote would result in England sinking in to the sea, and they'd still just sniff, 'too many johnny foreigners, innit' and vote Out anyway.
It's the same assumptions applied during the general election and given the result, would have painted half the population as greedy capitalists.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Jun 16 6.29pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
I would like to see your source on that. You are missing my point though. Even those with DB schemes are likely to have other investments that produce income for them. And those investments are being hit by the immediate risk of a possible Brexit and the hiatus that would cause. And if Brexit happens will continue to be hit until a new equilibrium is reached. The concept that the risk of Remain is just as high is clearly bananas, just follow the Stock Market and you will see that. And the idea that the chaos will be 'minimal and short-term' is also madness, how long do people think it will take to renegotiate all of the trade deals for a start. Take an economic shock and the set-back in terms of knock-on effects of under-investment can last a generation, as in Japan. And since you raise it, housing. The older generation owns housing and benefits from its inflated price, whether or not that is driven by our EU membership. If it's true leaving frees up housing stock, again it's the older generation that will subsidise the future of the younger generation by a lessening in the value of their properties. So, like I said above, it is very kind of the older generation to forego a significant proportion of their wealth for the future of the younger generation. Let's hope the benefits they anticipate coming eventually from Brexit do in fact materialise or all of their sacrifice will come to naught. Good on them is all I can say, clearly they know what they are doing when they vote. I can't be arsed to look up the actual statistics, we are in broad agreement anyway - especially your final paragraph.
|
|
| nickgusset |
|
|---|---|
|
THE EU ATTACKS WAGES AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BRIAN DENNY LOOKS AT HOW THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION HAS WAGED WAR ON TRADE UNIONS AND KEPT WAGES DOWN FOR WORKING PEOPLE ACROSS ITS MEMBER STATES THE EU is not defending workers’ rights as the Remainiacs never cease to claim. In fact the EU is directly behind the huge assault on wages, pensions, collective bargaining and other workers’ rights across the EU, including the current battle going on in France. Moreover it is being done in contravention of its own treaties in a typically bureaucratic and Byzantine way. Officially, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU, Article 153.5), explicitly states that the EU has no competences in the area of wage policy. Yet this has not prevented EU institutions such as the European Commission, the European Central Bank (ECB) or even the European Council from demanding wage “moderation” across the EU. The Broad Economic Policy Guidelines (BEPG), regularly produced by the Commission since 1993, always included demands for wage “moderation.” However a new system of European economic governance began to emerge in 2010 with the adoption of the controversial, neoliberal Europe 2020 strategy, which included a yearly cycle of EU economic policy co-ordination. This explicitly includes wage policy which is considered the most important adjustment variable for promoting “competitiveness.” The legal basis for this new form of “authoritarian neoliberalism” as it has been called comprises above all the Euro Plus Pact adopted on the initiative of Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy in March 2011. As a result, while EU competence over wage policy is still expressly forbidden, with the Euro Plus Pact wage policy intervention at EU level is now mystically allowed. Now the EU issues annual policy recommendations for all member states which must then be transformed into national “reform programmes” whose effectiveness will again be assessed by the EU. The annual economic co-ordination cycle was further developed in 2011 with the adoption of a package of five Regulations and one Directive. The so-called “six-pack” contains two new major instruments in order to intensify economic policy co-ordination: one is the establishment of a new system of surveillance and the second is the introduction of fines on those countries that fail to comply. The 2013 Treaty for Stability, Co-ordination and Governance (TSCG) further reinforced mechanisms to enable the EU to “co-ordinate and monitor the economic and budgetary policies of the member states.” Each February the Commission publishes detailed reports on each country and their “progress.” This year’s report pointed out an “excessive” imbalance — too much public expenditure and a lack of competitiveness. However, it recorded “substantial progress in the matter of reducing the cost of labour and retirement pension reform.” On April 13, the French government adopted its EU National Programme of Reform (NPR) and acquiesced to EU demands for “giving more latitude to companies, to adapt wages and working hours to their economic situation” — ie huge changes to French employment law. It is this that French workers are fighting against. The scope for EU attacks on wages and collective bargaining expanded most rapidly in those crisis-hit countries which rely on “bailouts” from the EU and/or the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In exchange for bailouts, these countries had to introduce “reforms” laid down either in so-called memorandums of understanding with the Troika of EU, European Central Bank (ECB) and IMF in the case of Greece, Ireland and Portugal, or in “stand-by arrangements” with the IMF, in the case of Hungary, Latvia and Romania. These policy measures comprised attacks on wages, social services and public ownership and far-reaching labour market “reforms” including the abolition of systems of collective bargaining. There is a simple reason for this — where there is no collective bargaining there is a decline in wages. For the hard-line German member of the ECB Executive Board Joerg Asmussen, labour market “reforms” such as removing collective rights are even “the key if a country wishes to remain within the euro.” As a result attacks on workers at national level are being driven by a new EU interventionism in an unprecedented way. For example prior to the 2008 crisis, Romania had a legal system that supported dialogue between trade unions, employers and the government, resulting in widespread collective bargaining at all levels. By 2011, at the behest of the EU, the government had scrapped all collective agreements and changed, without parliamentary debate, the main labour laws, making it impossible to have cross-sectoral collective agreements. The recession was thus exploited by the EU and a compliant government in Bucharest as a pretext to rip the guts out of the existing industrial relations system and lower labour costs. Even the EU-funded European Trade Union Confederation general secretary Bernadette Segol identified two fronts where collective bargaining is coming under attack: the decentralisation of bargaining and allowing employers to ignore trade union bodies in favour of non-union bodies. Addressing the theme of Social Europe, she points out that “policies that are being implemented are attacking industrial relations systems, putting pressure on wages, weakening public services and weakening social protection. “These are the core aspects of the social model,” confirming the view of many observers that the model is now dead — if indeed it was ever alive at all. Brian Denny is a spokesman for Trade Unionists Against the EU. Edited by nickgusset (16 Jun 2016 7.22pm)
|
|
|
Originally posted by johnfirewall
It's the same assumptions applied during the general election and given the result, would have painted half the population as greedy capitalists.
You 'imagined' most of the Brexit voters had carefully thought through the options. I imagine the opposite- that a considerable number (and I've no idea where your 50% came from) will be voting based on immigration alone, unaware or uncaring of any other factors. Could be 10%, 20%, whatever. But a fair number- particularly among the politically ignorant, who vote Tory/Labour each GE because the Sun told them to. A similar number of the Remain camp will be similarly fixated on the economy, with little regard for factors like immigration, sovereignty etc. I have no doubt that you, personally, have carefully considered the options. So have I. You must concede, however that a worrying number of people have no idea of the issues, and have just fixated on the most high profile waffle spouted by both sides- immigration for leave, economy for remain. This is what irritates me- people voting with no real, clear idea what they are voting for. They've read a few headlines, seen a few scare stories, made up their minds and won't be shifted whatever anyone says now. And they will be the first ones complaining when the economy crashes or we are swamped with immigrants- "I didn't know." Wrong- you didn't bother to find out.
|
|
| nickgusset |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
You 'imagined' most of the Brexit voters had carefully thought through the options. I imagine the opposite- that a considerable number (and I've no idea where your 50% came from) will be voting based on immigration alone, unaware or uncaring of any other factors. Could be 10%, 20%, whatever. But a fair number- particularly among the politically ignorant, who vote Tory/Labour each GE because the Sun told them to. A similar number of the Remain camp will be similarly fixated on the economy, with little regard for factors like immigration, sovereignty etc. I have no doubt that you, personally, have carefully considered the options. So have I. You must concede, however that a worrying number of people have no idea of the issues, and have just fixated on the most high profile waffle spouted by both sides- immigration for leave, economy for remain. This is what irritates me- people voting with no real, clear idea what they are voting for. They've read a few headlines, seen a few scare stories, made up their minds and won't be shifted whatever anyone says now. And they will be the first ones complaining when the economy crashes or we are swamped with immigrants- "I didn't know." Wrong- you didn't bother to find out. Two things. 2) Not all brexiters are racist but I bet all racists are brexiters.
|
|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Two things. 2) Not all brexiters are racist but I bet all racists are brexiters. Well said again Nick, wise beyond your years, i think you are on a roll young man...
|
|
|
Originally posted by JohnyBoy
Well said again Nick, wise beyond your years, i think you are on a roll young man... Get a room, girls.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
Get a room, girls. Get a groom boys
|
|
| nickgusset |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by JohnyBoy
Well said again Nick, wise beyond your years, i think you are on a roll young man... You must be about 70 if you think I'm young.
|
|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
You must be about 70 if you think I'm young. Haha... nope still mid 40s ish, but common sense, empathy (the highest form of human intelligence) and judgement has no age boundaries.....
|
|
|
Originally posted by JohnyBoy
Haha... nope still mid 40s ish, but common sense, empathy (the highest form of human intelligence) and judgement has no age boundaries..... Nor does delusion, old chap.
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.