Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 674 of 2586 < 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 >

Topic Locked

Kermit8 Hevon 27 Jun 17 8.24am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Do you get a semi-on while you have these fantasies? Nah. I am more of a Pinot Grigio man. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 27 Jun 17 8.24am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Do you get a semi-on while you have these fantasies?

Nah. I am more of a Pinot Grigio man.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 8.59am
Originally posted by hedgehog50 Your question was "Can anyone name me some edict from an EU unelected official which has impacted negatively on their life?" I answered your question. The new regulations were entirely EU imposed. I was confirming if you meant Building Regs. I was also pointing out that the "edict" wasn't "make domestic oil tanks more expensive". Just because something costs more doesn't automatically make it negative. If you buy a house in Chelsea you'd expect to pay more than if the same house was in Corby. I'd rather live in Chelsea. I'd also rather have an oil tank that I knew was safe and had been properly made and fitted and pay a bit more for that security. Edited by CambridgeEagle (27 Jun 2017 9.01am)
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 8.59am

Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle

Originally posted by hedgehog50

Your question was "Can anyone name me some edict from an EU unelected official which has impacted negatively on their life?"

I answered your question. The new regulations were entirely EU imposed.

I was confirming if you meant Building Regs. I was also pointing out that the "edict" wasn't "make domestic oil tanks more expensive".

Just because something costs more doesn't automatically make it negative. If you buy a house in Chelsea you'd expect to pay more than if the same house was in Corby. I'd rather live in Chelsea. I'd also rather have an oil tank that I knew was safe and had been properly made and fitted and pay a bit more for that security.

Edited by CambridgeEagle (27 Jun 2017 9.01am)

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.08am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Well the fact that Ukip haven't passed a law is kind of my point. They haven't affected you in law yet I bet you don't like them....mainly because of their influence and affect and how they affect the political climate. It's the same with the EU....it's just from the other side.....and the EU actually have massively more power than Ukip. You may think that the Tories can't handle leaving the EU but I completely disagree that Labour could get anything like as good a deal. We have already see the illogical positions Labour and your ideological bedfellow Keir have taken up....when seen against the ruthless nature of the EU I think your preference for Labour doesn't hold water. Having said that...if Labour were actually taking these talks I can't for the life of me believe they would be as accommodating as they put out. In these negotiations the EU aren't the enemy. Sadly the Tories have been making them out to be just that and it will damage our position to be so confrontational. Labour prioritise things that are common interests and not threats to create a tax haven on the shores of Europe. They would also make an actually sensible and fair offer on EU migrants' rights and that would get things off to a good and amicable start. May has just made a mess of it so far. Ever since she became PM she's been making a mess of Brexit - High Court battle (waste of time and our money), calling and election AFTER article 50 (waste of time) which she messed up and left herself and her negotiating position beholden to crackpots from the DUP and self-indulgent factions from within her own party, threats from day one, which were subsequently rowed back on (agreeing divorce bill before trade negotiations), and now this paltry offer on EU migrants which the EU have told her isn't sufficient. I think she just enjoys making U-turn after U-turn. She's in no position to be negotiating Brexit and is completely incapable of getting a good deal. The sooner we have another election and get a party with an actual mandate the better.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.08am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well the fact that Ukip haven't passed a law is kind of my point.

They haven't affected you in law yet I bet you don't like them....mainly because of their influence and affect and how they affect the political climate.

It's the same with the EU....it's just from the other side.....and the EU actually have massively more power than Ukip.

You may think that the Tories can't handle leaving the EU but I completely disagree that Labour could get anything like as good a deal.

We have already see the illogical positions Labour and your ideological bedfellow Keir have taken up....when seen against the ruthless nature of the EU I think your preference for Labour doesn't hold water.

Having said that...if Labour were actually taking these talks I can't for the life of me believe they would be as accommodating as they put out.

In these negotiations the EU aren't the enemy. Sadly the Tories have been making them out to be just that and it will damage our position to be so confrontational.

Labour prioritise things that are common interests and not threats to create a tax haven on the shores of Europe. They would also make an actually sensible and fair offer on EU migrants' rights and that would get things off to a good and amicable start. May has just made a mess of it so far. Ever since she became PM she's been making a mess of Brexit - High Court battle (waste of time and our money), calling and election AFTER article 50 (waste of time) which she messed up and left herself and her negotiating position beholden to crackpots from the DUP and self-indulgent factions from within her own party, threats from day one, which were subsequently rowed back on (agreeing divorce bill before trade negotiations), and now this paltry offer on EU migrants which the EU have told her isn't sufficient. I think she just enjoys making U-turn after U-turn.

She's in no position to be negotiating Brexit and is completely incapable of getting a good deal. The sooner we have another election and get a party with an actual mandate the better.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.10am
Originally posted by .TUX. As we know, two more Italian banks failed over the weekend-- Banco Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Banca. The Italian Prime Minister himself stated that depositors’ funds were at risk, so the government stepped in with a bailout and guarantee package that could cost taxpayers as much as 17 billion euros. That’s a lot of money, around 1% of GDP (it’s basically as much as they spent on national defense last year according to an estimate by Italian think tank IAI). You don’t have to have a PhD in economics to figure out that NO government can afford to spend its entire defense budget every time a couple of medium-sized banks need a bailout. That goes especially for Italy, whose public debt level is already 132% of GDP… and rising. They simply don’t have the money. The thing is........Italy has LOTS of banks that are on the ropes. Throw into the mix the continual problems in Greece and Spain (along with the Deutsche Bank problems that haven't gone away) then the EU (ECB) looks to be in a bit of a pickle. But all is well according to many? Hmmmm, good luck with that. Exactly one of the major reasons the EU is in need of serious reform.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.10am

Originally posted by .TUX.

As we know, two more Italian banks failed over the weekend-- Banco Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Banca.
The Italian Prime Minister himself stated that depositors’ funds were at risk, so the government stepped in with a bailout and guarantee package that could cost taxpayers as much as 17 billion euros.
That’s a lot of money, around 1% of GDP (it’s basically as much as they spent on national defense last year according to an estimate by Italian think tank IAI).
You don’t have to have a PhD in economics to figure out that NO government can afford to spend its entire defense budget every time a couple of medium-sized banks need a bailout.
That goes especially for Italy, whose public debt level is already 132% of GDP… and rising. They simply don’t have the money.
The thing is........Italy has LOTS of banks that are on the ropes.
Throw into the mix the continual problems in Greece and Spain (along with the Deutsche Bank problems that haven't gone away) then the EU (ECB) looks to be in a bit of a pickle.
But all is well according to many? Hmmmm, good luck with that.

Exactly one of the major reasons the EU is in need of serious reform.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.19am
Originally posted by hedgehog50 Supporting the banks was to avoid severe economic problems that would have badly affected ordinary people too - a 1930s style depression. But yes, you could argue that it could have been left to market forces to resolve things eventually. And result in widespread poverty and destitution along the way for ordinary people who had nothing to do with it? I, for one, am glad that we've got an independent SFO now finally charging some of these bankers with fraud for what they did in the run up to and during the GFC. This is the SFO that Theresa May wanted to abolish... wonder why. Thankfully her defeat means that policy was binned along with all of the other dreadful rubbish she was trying to foist on us. We need more accountability of these people and more oversight of their actions. Market intervention is required in financial services where there are such great inefficiencies caused by huge asymmetries of information and collusion.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.19am

Originally posted by hedgehog50

Supporting the banks was to avoid severe economic problems that would have badly affected ordinary people too - a 1930s style depression. But yes, you could argue that it could have been left to market forces to resolve things eventually.

And result in widespread poverty and destitution along the way for ordinary people who had nothing to do with it?

I, for one, am glad that we've got an independent SFO now finally charging some of these bankers with fraud for what they did in the run up to and during the GFC. This is the SFO that Theresa May wanted to abolish... wonder why. Thankfully her defeat means that policy was binned along with all of the other dreadful rubbish she was trying to foist on us.

We need more accountability of these people and more oversight of their actions. Market intervention is required in financial services where there are such great inefficiencies caused by huge asymmetries of information and collusion.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.22am
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle I was confirming if you meant Building Regs. I was also pointing out that the "edict" wasn't "make domestic oil tanks more expensive". Just because something costs more doesn't automatically make it negative. If you buy a house in Chelsea you'd expect to pay more than if the same house was in Corby. I'd rather live in Chelsea. I'd also rather have an oil tank that I knew was safe and had been properly made and fitted and pay a bit more for that security. Edited by CambridgeEagle (27 Jun 2017 9.01am) It is a bunch of unelected bureaucrats somewhere in Europe laying down rules and regulations for people and situations in places whose local conditions and requirements they have no appreciation of. We enjoyed many, many years of safe reasonably priced oil storage tanks, we are of course better placed to create our own rules and regulations which suit us. This example is indicative of the EU stranglehold that the majority in this country wish to escape from. 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

hedgehog50

Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.22am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

I was confirming if you meant Building Regs. I was also pointing out that the "edict" wasn't "make domestic oil tanks more expensive".

Edited by CambridgeEagle (27 Jun 2017 9.01am)

It is a bunch of unelected bureaucrats somewhere in Europe laying down rules and regulations for people and situations in places whose local conditions and requirements they have no appreciation of. We enjoyed many, many years of safe reasonably priced oil storage tanks, we are of course better placed to create our own rules and regulations which suit us. This example is indicative of the EU stranglehold that the majority in this country wish to escape from.

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

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.30am
Originally posted by Mstrobez That's because it is simple. Since June of last year, we as a European powerhouse have seen less economic growth than Greece. What is hard to decipher about that? Come on you must have some well prepared spin. Worth taking into account the positive move in the markets the day of the ruling for Brexit to be passed through parliament. Although you lot seemed to be very unhappy on the morning that everyone found out that we are actually a sovereign nation with a high court who rules to ensure British legislation is adhered to. Edited by Mstrobez (26 Jun 2017 11.25pm) One of our biggest problems is the reliance our economy places on consumer credit which in turn is propped up by unsecured short term borrowings. Private indebtedness is back at worryingly high levels. Our house is built on sand. As inflation has kicked in as a result of falls in the value of the pound consumers have tightened their belts and so GDP has suffered. The predicted boost to exports has happened, but our manufacturing base has been eroded to such an extent that the impact is insufficient and the fact that we import more than we export, including inputs into manufacturing (and hence our exports). The other big issue is austerity which has placed ever more reliance on consumer spending to drive the economy. Austerity has created an unstable economy and also denigrated our public services, allowed infrastructure to crumble and people to be ignored and underutilised all in the name of a Tory ideology. Utterly irresponsible and reprehensible. It has failed and yet May continues with it. She should give that magic money tree she found the £1bn to buy off the DUP with a shake and see if the £350m a week for the NHS falls out.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.30am

Originally posted by Mstrobez

That's because it is simple. Since June of last year, we as a
European powerhouse have seen less economic growth than Greece. What is hard to decipher about that? Come on you must have some well prepared spin. Worth taking into account the positive move in the markets the day of the ruling for Brexit to be passed through parliament. Although you lot seemed to be very unhappy on the morning that everyone found out that we are actually a sovereign nation with a high court who rules to ensure British legislation is adhered to.

Edited by Mstrobez (26 Jun 2017 11.25pm)

One of our biggest problems is the reliance our economy places on consumer credit which in turn is propped up by unsecured short term borrowings. Private indebtedness is back at worryingly high levels. Our house is built on sand. As inflation has kicked in as a result of falls in the value of the pound consumers have tightened their belts and so GDP has suffered. The predicted boost to exports has happened, but our manufacturing base has been eroded to such an extent that the impact is insufficient and the fact that we import more than we export, including inputs into manufacturing (and hence our exports).

The other big issue is austerity which has placed ever more reliance on consumer spending to drive the economy.

Austerity has created an unstable economy and also denigrated our public services, allowed infrastructure to crumble and people to be ignored and underutilised all in the name of a Tory ideology. Utterly irresponsible and reprehensible. It has failed and yet May continues with it.

She should give that magic money tree she found the £1bn to buy off the DUP with a shake and see if the £350m a week for the NHS falls out.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.31am
Originally posted by hedgehog50 It is a bunch of unelected bureaucrats somewhere in Europe laying down rules and regulations for people and situations in places whose local conditions and requirements they have no appreciation of. We enjoyed many, many years of safe reasonably priced oil storage tanks, we are of course better placed to create our own rules and regulations which suit us. This example is indicative of the EU stranglehold that the majority in this country wish to escape from. OK many of those bureaucrats are indeed elected. Sorry to say that building regs will only become more strict in the future so your oil tanks won't be getting any cheaper once we leave the EU.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 9.31am

Originally posted by hedgehog50

OK many of those bureaucrats are indeed elected.

Sorry to say that building regs will only become more strict in the future so your oil tanks won't be getting any cheaper once we leave the EU.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.43am
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle OK many of those bureaucrats are indeed elected. Sorry to say that building regs will only become more strict in the future so your oil tanks won't be getting any cheaper once we leave the EU. The only EU official that I can vote for is my Member of the European Parliament - whoever he or she might be. I am happy to abide by local rules and regulations. 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

hedgehog50

Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.43am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

OK many of those bureaucrats are indeed elected.

Sorry to say that building regs will only become more strict in the future so your oil tanks won't be getting any cheaper once we leave the EU.

The only EU official that I can vote for is my Member of the European Parliament - whoever he or she might be. I am happy to abide by local rules and regulations.

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

steeleye20 Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.54am
Originally posted by hedgehog50 The only EU official that I can vote for is my Member of the European Parliament - whoever he or she might be. I am happy to abide by local rules and regulations. So what's your problem.
Alert a moderator to this post

steeleye20

Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.54am

Originally posted by hedgehog50

The only EU official that I can vote for is my Member of the European Parliament - whoever he or she might be. I am happy to abide by local rules and regulations.

So what's your problem.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.56am
Originally posted by steeleye20 So what's your problem. EU rules and regulations aren't local and are imposed by unelected commissioners. 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

hedgehog50

Croydon 27 Jun 17 9.56am

Originally posted by steeleye20

So what's your problem.

EU rules and regulations aren't local and are imposed by unelected commissioners.

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

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Jun 17 10.02am
Originally posted by hedgehog50 EU rules and regulations aren't local and are imposed by unelected commissioners. What if they are better rules and regulations than those that would be imposed upon you by your MP and the 649 MPs you couldn't vote for? And those civil servants you don't vote for. And all those "advisers" and "chiefs of staff" and "policy wonks" who you definitely don't vote for. And the Tory paymasters. The biggest corporate donors to the Tories in the run up to this election was the property industry. By a long way. They gave Labour nothing. Why - they like deregulation when it comes to building things and aspects such as minimum standards and health and safety. How has that worked out for ordinary people?
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 27 Jun 17 10.02am

Originally posted by hedgehog50

EU rules and regulations aren't local and are imposed by unelected commissioners.

What if they are better rules and regulations than those that would be imposed upon you by your MP and the 649 MPs you couldn't vote for? And those civil servants you don't vote for. And all those "advisers" and "chiefs of staff" and "policy wonks" who you definitely don't vote for. And the Tory paymasters. The biggest corporate donors to the Tories in the run up to this election was the property industry. By a long way. They gave Labour nothing. Why - they like deregulation when it comes to building things and aspects such as minimum standards and health and safety. How has that worked out for ordinary people?

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 674 of 2586 < 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors