This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
nickgusset  Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 8.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
At what point do these small businesses become Capitalist exploiters of the people and subject to all the force of Socialist fury? Stop being an arse.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Apr 17 11.25am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Stop being an arse. That is a valuable lesson you could learn yourself. In your case I would say "Stop continually being an arse" though. I won't hold my breath..... as I said earlier this morning I can't even post 'Happy Easter' without you misinterpreting it FFS.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 davenotamonkey 16 Apr 17 11.56am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Seems like the EU are playing hardball and galvanising after May's tax haven threats... Who'd have thought that might happen. Edited by nickgusset (16 Apr 2017 1.17am) Well done. You've just basically reposted what is essentially a Grauniad repost of the same "doom-and-gloom". I responded to it in the post below. I'll reiterate my complete lack of surprise that EU-specific bloat is going to leave a country that will not be a member of the EU in (less than!) two years time. As is exactly the case with banking, I can't help thinking that a Brext-UK should join forces with the other pharmaceutical giant of Europe. Nope, it's not Malta. It's not Latvia. It's not Belgium. The Swiss have (again) managed absolutely fine outside (and highly likely as a result) of not being chained to the EMA and their associated directives. Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Fantastic news. The EU Clinical Trials directive, as enforced by this body, has very severely curtailed clinical trial-led research in this country, with output dropping sharply after the directive was rubber-stamped. This has impacted cancer and HIV research. The next millstone around the neck of biomedical research, due next year, is an EU Regulation: so wouldn't even be rubber-stamped by the Commons, it just passes into law with ZERO debate here. This regulation will be even more restrictive (the EU just love top-down Soviet-style red tape). Our biomedical research industry is huge, but has been throttled (as with a lot of science shoehorned into lobbyist-driven "EU frameworks" Moreover, to suggest a regulatory body in existence, purely because of (excessive) EU oversight, would remain in a non-EU country is hilarious. My bet is a vast number of actual (ie useful, and not pen-pushing) jobs in the EMA will move to the Wellcome Trust, Sanger Institute etc. Dropping the excessive over-regulation of research will accelerate bio-funding into the UK, generate more jobs and (hopefully) lead to advances that will combat scourges like AIDS and Parkinson's. I won't be sad to see the EMA go.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
by excessive bureaucratic overhead and restrictive constraints not encountered in powerhouses like the US.| Hoof Hearted 16 Apr 17 12.03pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Well done. You've just basically reposted what is essentially a Grauniad repost of the same "doom-and-gloom". I responded to it in the post below. I'll reiterate my complete lack of surprise that EU-specific bloat is going to leave a country that will not be a member of the EU in (less than!) two years time. As is exactly the case with banking, I can't help thinking that a Brext-UK should join forces with the other pharmaceutical giant of Europe. Nope, it's not Malta. It's not Latvia. It's not Belgium. The Swiss have (again) managed absolutely fine outside (and highly likely as a result) of not being chained to the EMA and their associated directives. Sadly Dave.... you have probably wasted your time again. He'll regurgitate this again in a few weeks time. Edited by Hoof Hearted (16 Apr 2017 12.04pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 12.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
That is a valuable lesson you could learn yourself. In your case I would say "Stop continually being an arse" though. I won't hold my breath..... as I said earlier this morning I can't even post 'Happy Easter' without you misinterpreting it FFS. Nope he was being an arse, making a snide comment rather than addressing what Corbyn said.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 1.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Nope he was being an arse, making a snide comment rather than addressing what Corbyn said. I wasn't making a snide comment. I was merely pointing out the contradiction of Labour supposedly supporting small businesses while their dogma says that all means of production, distribution and exchange should be nationalised. My specific point was asking when a business becomes big enough and successful enough to be regarded as that bad for society by Labour.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 16 Apr 17 3.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
their dogma says that all means of production, distribution and exchange should be nationalised. But it doesn't, does it? That's Marxist / Leninist communuism and not, despite what you'd perhaps like to assert, the doctrine of "Corbynistas". Originally posted by hedgehog50
My specific point was asking when a business becomes big enough and successful enough to be regarded as that bad for society by Labour. On the other hand this is a good question and, as someone who doesn't consider social democratic policies to be dirty, I'll bite on: IMO, "bad for the country" includes any and all private monopolies / cartels and any operation that runs non-discretionary services for profit. If profit is the return for risk taking and innovation, where's the risk in supplying mains water and sewerage, or for running prisons just as a couple of examples? Placing profits and investor rewards above the best interests of the (large) majority of a country's population is plain wrong - as we could well see if this government can break the back of the NHS.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 4.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle
But it doesn't, does it? That's Marxist / Leninist communuism and not, despite what you'd perhaps like to assert, the doctrine of "Corbynistas". But the original clause 4 says: Corbyn in 2015 said:
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 4.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
But the original clause 4 says: Corbyn in 2015 said: What do you think he meant by that, secret police raiding one of a chain of hairdressers someone has built up or challenging private ownership of what should be public assets e.g water, railways etc?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 5.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
What do you think he meant by that, secret police raiding one of a chain of hairdressers someone has built up or challenging private ownership of what should be public assets e.g water, railways etc? Presumably he meant what he said "restoring the Clause Four as it was originally written" ie: "the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange". Edited by hedgehog50 (16 Apr 2017 5.08pm)
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 16 Apr 17 5.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Stop being an arse. Remarkable how often you get away with insulting people on here. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (16 Apr 2017 5.34pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 20 Apr 17 5.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Anybody wondering like me why the coming election has been called over brexit? The new government will not be seen any differently in the forthcoming negotiation the PM only has power in the UK. My take is that she will be able to say that she was only carrying out her new mandate if it all collapses. It was their fault for voting for me.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.