:brexit: Brexit - The Ramifications

Reasonably serious discussion
7040

First of all, plenty of EU countries have been involved in the so-called coalition of the willing conflicts of the past, France having a particularly strong part to play in the destruction of Libya. If you’re not sure, check. I’ll cede that none of them did the Falklands except us.

Second, you’re not comparing like with like, especially now. There is a huge difference between the armed forces of a democratic state, ultimately accountable to an electable Parliament, and an army controlled by an unelected executive on a continent wide scale.

How, for example, does such a body maintain the principle of not stationing military troops on domestic soil? What sort of threat would it face? How do we, as EU citizens, demand it take a different course?

We have not been nice operators on the world stage, but we’ve got the opportunity to vote someone committed to non violent solutions into power, and in charge of our defence and armed forces.

You can never do that with anything controlled by the EU, a point which seems to have eluded you for this entire debate.

7041

The problem with the above is it ignores simple little things such as ‘NATO’ - how long have British troops been stationed abroad, Germany, Malta, Cyprus… etc… if you think our ‘unilateral’ decisions such as the Falklands were ‘unilateral’ then you are also forgetting teh ‘go ahead’ Thatcher got from Reagan… The ‘unilateral’ decisions to be involved in those other conflicts were also driven by need - to keep aligned with the US.

I would almost guarantee that an integrated European Army would have been involved in LESS conflicts in the last 30 years than our ‘Integrated’ actions with the US.

You may well believe that with Corbyn at the Helm it would be different, that we would in effect change to the German Army model of no aggressive acts, but there is always compromise… We want a better free trade agreement with the US, needed to compensate for EU trade losses? You believe that wont come with some nasty strings attached? that you or I will would get to hear about? Do you really believe that A Corbyn Government would be transparent about such things? Sorry, but that is breathtakingly naive.

7042

You may be comfy with placing your national security in the hands of people like Juncker and Tusk. Your conflicts decided by an unelected executive. Many people are not.

I am not forgetting NATO either. My view is that it no longer has any need to exist. There isn’t a big red ideological threat lurking in Eastern Europe anymore. NATO exercises on the Russian border are incredibly provocative.

You’re also not considering which countries this army would fight. I think if an EU Army had existed when the Ukraine crisis boiled over, there would already be an EU division or ten in Donetsk.

7043
7044

Pulls pin and hides:
https://twitter.com/danieljohnsalt/status/1070955470381375490

3 Likes
7045

An EU Army? Dreaming up an argument against an organisation that doesn’t exist involved mendaciously in scenarios that aren’t real. Bloody hell, if that’s not Project Fear, i don’t know what is!

2 Likes
7046

:zipper_mouth_face:

1 Like
7047

Oh, that’s interesting. Does that mean that all of @Map-Of-Tasmania’s posts about me not caring about the poor or claiming that supply and demand doesn’t work the same way I think it does were wrong?

It’s a shame @WorzelScummage isn’t about. It would have been nice for him to learn this lesson too.

He was always going on about how economically illiterate others were.

7048

Nobody likes a gloater :lou_wink_2:

1 Like
7049

Nobody likes getting tag teamed by idiots, but it happens.

image

7050

That’s twice in a week the Bushwhackers have been referenced, maybe they’ll start trending and make a comeback.

3 Likes
7051

Sorry it’s the Express, I feel dirty now

7052

… once again there is much backslapping and joyfulness that seasonal low paid, low skilled workers have seen a highly needed increase in their basic wage… from a low starting point. This is indeed a good thing, how can it not be. BUT as mentioned, from an individual perspective earning £8.50 an hour instead of £7.30 etc might give great percentage headlines and give those ‘supply and demand’ obsessed an hard-on, but they those oversimplify it when they assume its the ONLY thing that impacts on wages… yawwwwwwwn

Problem is ALL the examples to date of the huge supply and demand impact has been on …hospitality and seasonal low paid work… where is the increase in wages that will drive the tax revenues that will enable important services to be increased and see an end to austerity? Jobs delivered through economic growth…

Without an economic upturn, outside of the seasonal variance, we will just see higher wages paid to FEWER staff…

Oh and one other thing. Wages were only kept low in these sectors when there was more supply, because too many BRITISH firms were happy to exploit lack of regulation. If you have a decent minimum wage and contracts, then supply in these sectors would have less of an influence than experience and quality. In effect the influencing factors on wages are less about supply and more about what skill and experience you bring - its why waiters at Le Manoir earn decent salaries based on full time contracts because of their training and excellence … despite the country being overrun with ‘millions’ of cheap waiters from Bulgaria… but for some stubborn fucktards, supply and demand is the only influencing factor…

The BIGGEST influence on sustainable wage increased for individuals is education and experience - to make yourself more in ‘demand’

7053

I still don’t think you understand supply and demand.

I think you should hold off calling people fucktards until you do.

Would you like me to make a simple diagram? Once you’re done with it, you can show it to nine year olds so that they understand supply and demand too.

7054

No I am happy to call folks a fucktard - I am sure you can draw the nice 0-Level economics graph of supply and demand like any fucktard. What you seem too stubborn to concede is that it never has been nor never will be the biggest influence on sustainable wage increases - which are driven by growth… Supply and demand is reactive in that it does not equal ‘SUSTAINABLE’ - but is relative to other factors

eg. If you need 10 people with no skills and you have 30 to chose from, then yes you can almost do a reverse auction and take the first 10 to agree to work for the lowest wage (above or below any minimum wage) - that is your current position, yes

So if there are only 10 and you need 10 and they refuse to work for what you are offering, then that forces employer to put wages up - your current explanation, yes?

Now that is SUPPLY and DEMAND… but what you have FAILED to continually grasp, and why I have had to call you up for being a fucktard is that this is NOT the only impact factor on SUSTAINABLE wage increases… I really do not understand why you dont see this?

How much is paid, or should I say how much is affordable is a delicate economic balance… you can pay more because of low supply, but you risk being less competitive or you need to employer FEWER people. This in simple terms is not good… I am sure you would agree. Because what happens then is with less employed people… (you still with me?) you have less ‘DEMAND’ for your goods and services as less folks in employment who can afford them… or your own cost increases drive up prices of your goods and services and thus 'demand ’ decreases, either way you risk being less productive, the economy suffers with less workers paying in to the HMRC and less services available for those no longer working in the shitty low paid jobs… this is a very simplistic model but I feel i need to keep it that way for you… There are a ton of big weighty economics texts by various nobel prize winners who explain a lot of these more complex models, but they are really not necessary to grasp what is a simple concept…

Now, you can argue all you like about the meaning of supply and demand… but as indicated its not the only game in town.

SUSTAINABLE wage growth across a WHOLE population is ONLY achieved through economic growth. This is best achieved through up-skilling the labour force to be better at their jobs, better than the competition, more efficient and productive with education and experience … YNOt just be removing a ton of polish plumbers or Bulgarian waiters from teh workforce…YES the growth in the economy does indeed create more DEMAND for these skills and thus supply laws will impact on ENTRY wages, which can fall again if demand reduces or supply is increased, but does not impact on wages of those contracted and with higher skills - the skills that drive growth.

I will happily concede that you do appear to know what a simple definition of supply and demand is… but that you deliberately fail to grasp that this not the main driver or SUSTAINABLE wage growth

7055

We’re at almost full employment.

Brexit will remove many from the labour market, which means that those jobs are either going to need filling or didn’t need filling in the first place.

Hence your call for sustainable growth is bollocks. The immediate priority is going to be filling vacated positions which already exist.

7056

… what part of the words… ‘bigger picture’ do you not understand? BofE forecasts at best suggest negative growth of between 2-5% post Brexit subject to what deal we will get. You do know that means recession, if sustained for more than 2 successive quarters do you not? Best estimates that its likely to be years and anything over -2% is gong to be a big fucking mess… now the bankers will all have fucked off to Frankfurt, along with many white collar higher tax band jobs, leaving people on low incomes to pick up the tax burden… your ‘immediate concern’ seriously will not be an issue…

Your problem is you talk of the labour market like some 1970s Union rep… as if the vast majority of the country is employed in Industrial productivity, whose wages have been suppressed by the pesky immigrants from Eastern Europe… you need to get out more and stop reading crap written in 1973… ‘demand’ having been created in low skilled low paid service jobs does not drive an economy or GDP…and does not lead to SUSTAINABLE wage inflation…

I was talking about SUSTAINABLE wage increases - but you not reading a post correctly is hardly something new… sustainable wage increased are driven by sustainable growth, but they are two separate things…

7057

Problem with gloating is that it makes Pap look an even bigger fuckwit for once again failing to grasp a very simple concept… but does allow for copious laughter at his kindergarten-economics

7058

You’re talking nonsense, and its easily provable.

Now that we’ve got to a point where you’ve finally conceded that I’ve been right all along, that Brexit would help, not hurt the poor, and they’d be seeing wage increases commensurate with the drop in the supply of labour, you’re now arguing that these pay rises might not be sustainable.

Well, those hiring these new folk must be doing one of the following things:-

  1. Deciding that the wage they’re offering is sustainable
  2. Wittingly or otherwise, running their companies into the ground

Shall we send them your fevered nonsense so that they can make the necessary pay cuts?

image

7059

Whatever Pap, you keep trying to convince yourself of a future under Jezza without those nasty EU types preventing our glorious socialist, industrial, economic might from returning us to our former glories…

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

you cant make it it up… but you do.