Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[AngryOfTuebrook]

32 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Yes I think you do, do you also understand the protests against inequality and Macron in France? 

 

https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/growing-number-of-french-shocked-by-income-inequality/

 

Or are you going to act simplistic and tarr the protesters  as bigots and racists?

https://www.euronews.com/2018/04/26/which-countries-have-the-worst-income-inequality-in-europe-

 

Macron is a cunt.  French people are right to protest against income inequality; I'd like to see more of that here, given that income inequality is worse in the UK than in France.

 

Unfortunately, too many British people miss that point, because they are too easily gulled into thinking that immigrants are the problem (rather than laying the blame where it belongs - with the employers who exploit migrant and domestic workers alike and with successive UK Governments who have suppressed workers' rights).

 

If you really give a shit about inequality, you have to focus your efforts on securing more rights for all workers, instead of lining up alongside the Murdochs and Rees-Moggs of this world who want to strip workers of what rights they have left (including the right to freely live and work abroad).

[cloggypop]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

 

Yes I think you do, do you also understand the protests against inequality and Macron in France? 

 

https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/growing-number-of-french-shocked-by-income-inequality/

 

Or are you going to act simplistic and tarr the protesters  as bigots and racists?

How do you feel about the involvement of extreme right activists previously involved in Ukraine? 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 minutes ago, cloggypop said:

How do you feel about the involvement of extreme right activists previously involved in Ukraine? 

On the basis that he's four-square with Salvini, he's got a serious downer on immigrants and he's partial to a bit of anti-Gypsy racism, I'd guess he's relaxed about that.

[Gnasher]

8 hours ago, cloggypop said:

How do you feel about the involvement of extreme right activists previously involved in Ukraine? 

Not sure what it's got to do with people fighting inequality across the eu and I don't know a lot about the mob ypu mention but they sound a like a right bunch of cunts.

 

It does open the question why oh why were the EU so intent on expansion into the Balkans and Easten Europe?  All tyants love expansion. Id suggest our leaders thought it a good idea to wave a stick at Russia and also tap into a sea of low paid workers who could  fill low paid manual jobs.

[Gnasher]

8 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

On the basis that he's four-square with Salvini, he's got a serious downer on immigrants and he's partial to a bit of anti-Gypsy racism, I'd guess he's relaxed about that.

Please don't put words in my mouth angry, your mates on here do that often enough whilst pulling me up over spelling mistakes and reminding me how super de dupa intelligent they are.

 

As for your slur on siding with racists you're the one who thinks it fair that a white nurse from Poland gets preferential treatment to a black nurse from Ghana not me.

 

The report on the immigration figures i provided in the link a few posts above about immigration being underestimated for the EU whilst overstated for the rest of the world tells it's own story.

[Gnasher]

9 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

https://www.euronews.com/2018/04/26/which-countries-have-the-worst-income-inequality-in-europe-

 

Macron is a cunt.  French people are right to protest against income inequality; I'd like to see more of that here, given that income inequality is worse in the UK than in France.

 

Unfortunately, too many British people miss that point, because they are too easily gulled into thinking that immigrants are the problem (rather than laying the blame where it belongs - with the employers who exploit migrant and domestic workers alike and with successive UK Governments who have suppressed workers' rights).

 

If you really give a shit about inequality, you have to focus your efforts on securing more rights for all workers, instead of lining up alongside the Murdochs and Rees-Moggs of this world who want to strip workers of what rights they have left (including the right to freely live and work abroad).

I agree in general.with your first two paragraphs angry but may I take issue with your third If you don't mind?

 

You keep giving out this silly arguement about people siding with other people when you know it's not about that. Do you side with George Osborne, Nick Clegg Jess Phillips for example?  It's as lazy as calling someone a bigot

 

Now the real issue in your very last sentence is what it's at  It's where I disagree with you and probably the 95% of the posters your gang allow to post on this issue without ridicule. The free movement of labour is not the  workers utopia you like to paint, the evidence suggests otherwise, it's a pool of cheap labour on tap to be used and exploited. It's been very nicely dressed but the reality is even lower pay for immigrants who have already settled and the lowest paid faction of society; the last sentence is not my opinion angry it's a stone cold fact.

 

https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-wages/

[AngryOfTuebrook]

13 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Not sure what it's got to do with people fighting inequality across the eu and I don't know a lot about the mob ypu mention but they sound a like a right bunch of cunts.

 

It does open the question why oh why were the EU so intent on expansion into the Balkans and Easten Europe?  All tyants love expansion. Id suggest our leaders thought it a good idea to wave a stick at Russia and also tap into a sea of low paid workers who could  fill low paid manual jobs.

Did you just compare the EU to a "tyrant"? That is full-on Farridge language: preposterous, dishonest and designed to fire up the xenophobes.

 

As for the EU's eastward expansion, all countries applied to join and went through an application process which involves guarantees of greater democracy and freedom for its citizens.  (Witness how long-delayed Turkey's application is, as Turkey is still far from democratic.) Moreover, the eastward expansion of the EU is not, per se, seen as a threat by Russia or its allies. The eastern expansion of NATO, on the other hand, is seen as the kind of threat that can spark a war in Ukraine. 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

 

https://heterocephalusgabler.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/behind-brexit-lies-a-yearning-for-a-past-we-destroyed/amp/?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR0gvhBP55Qdn991ycJqR4qBr4JKfYI5Ev9vfo6qK-RznlkSAUhsjAoJnok

Behind Brexit lies a yearning for a past we destroyed.

 RussInCheshire

 

 

On the whole, I prefer the future: it’s where I intend to spend the coming years.

However, I do understand a perfectly natural sense of yearning nostalgia. I suspect that’s why most people voted for Brexit. The good old days were pretty good for most people.

Even people who weren’t alive then know, from their parents, that it was decent time to be starting out. You just have to ask about your dad’s free degree or the full-pay 2 year apprenticeship that led to his job for life; or look around the big family home your mum somehow managed to move into as the owner aged only 22. These things show, unequivocally, that things were – and still should be – better.

Like all economists, trade bodies, corporate leaders and non-UKIP or Tory politicians in the entire world, I think Brexit will make things worse. But I know those who chose it did so because they wanted change for the better. Change that looks like what the post-war period brought. They either remember it, or see it in their parents’ comparative comfort.

It was real. This is what it was like.

From the 40s through to the 80s, governments built up to 250,000 houses a year. They owned and defended major industries on our behalf, and the key strategy of any government was to have full employment and proper apprenticeships for anyone who wanted them.

Was that period perfect? Of course not. Bad things happened, poverty existed, governments screwed up, and there were wars and reversals and crises. But the general trend was for increased wealth, health, life expectancy, security, openness, home-ownership, saving, disposable income, social cohesion, and acceptance of others. In the years since the mid- to late-80s, to put it mildly, the pendulum swung back. Those gains – and for the vast majority of us, they were substantial gains – have juddered to a halt, stagnated, and then begin to slide inexorably back.

Prior to that, wages were high, growth was almost constant, unions ensured jobs were safe, education was free, productivity was strong, healthcare was well funded, and housing was cheap.

On the equivalent household income of £25,000 you could buy a house in London, own a car, and start a family. This is described neatly here.

Public pensions were secure and you retired at 60 or 65, a full 10 or 15 years earlier than young people will in future.

Personal debt was comparatively rare because – aside from mortgages – most things could be afforded on your wage. And mortgages were so cheap you could save a deposit for a London home – an actual 3 bed house of your own, not a cupboard to flatshare – in under 2 years.

Public debt was also low, and we kept it that way while managing to repay WW2 and build the NHS.

Government investment created the road system, publicly owned major industries, hospitals, postal and telephone services, public television, a power grid and a science and space programme. We even managed to introduce the Clean Air Act that started to protect the environment.

And at the same time, we gave away an empire but remained reasonably wealthy and powerful. And we managed to do this whilst accepting 1.4 million non-white (and, in large numbers, non-Christian) immigrants in the 1950s alone, and yet more in the 60s. Immigration – then, as now – didn’t destroy the economy, our traditions or our culture.

What did? Where did this utopia go? How did it all end?

Let me explain.

In that period the top rate of income tax was 95%: it’s now 45%. Business tax was 50%: it’s now 20%.

Since 1980, tax avoidance by the wealthy has doubled. Combined with those giant tax cuts, this means we now get 25% of what we used to from those who own the most.

Union membership was at 64% in the 70s. It’s now around 21%, and a mere 7% in the private sector. Every union in the world was, ultimately, formed by terrible employers. Now union power is gone, and guess what: the terrible employers are back.

And we used to own steel, water, car, electricity, gas, postal and other industries. Then, because it would somehow, magically “make things better”, we sold them to other countries. So now we send all that money overseas.

So what happened was this: every time you voted for smaller government and lower taxes, you voted to cut your income, pension, investment, and the availability of housing for your kids; and now you can’t afford to live well.

Every time you despised those on welfare and chose meaner, crueler leaders, you kicked away a piece of the framework on which your future happiness was built. And now your happiness is gone and you need someone to blame.

Every time you cursed the lefty BBC for charging £140 for TV and radio, you instead elected to give literally 6 times as much to Sky for showing exactly the same football matches you used to watch on terrestrial. And in doing so, you undermined the national in favour of the greedy.

Every time you turned your back on miners or shipbuilders or tube drivers who fought to save their jobs, you helped to destroy your protector; and now nobody sticks up for you.

Bulgarians didn’t do this. Jacques Delors didn’t. Muslims didn’t. The Labour Party didn’t. Jo Cox didn’t.

It’s true that the economy is big, and in pure numbers we’re the 7th richest country. But if one person has £200tn and everyone else has nothing, the country is still worth £200tn. Doesn’t mean the populace is wealthy.

Taking into account inequality and the enormous cost of living, we’re poorer than Equatorial Guinea. That wasn’t the case before we all decided it was good to be spiteful, greedy, short-termist idiots.

Behind Brexit lies this harsh fact: you’re a turkey who repeatedly voted for Christmas. You had multiple chances to vote for enlightened self-interest, and you blew it because you didn’t like how that funny-looking bloke ate a bacon sandwich.

I want to end this post with a brief diversion into 1970s metaphysics. Stick with me, it’s not gonna hurt.

The philosopher Robert M Persig argues that human thought can be divided into two types, which he calls Classic and Romantic.

A Classic person doesn’t care about the label you apply to something, only the function. Yes, the house is ugly, but who cares: it’s well-built and is just a box for sleeping in.

A Romantic person is not especially interested in function, mainly in form. The surface is the most important factor in assessing something – if the house is pretty, who cares if there’s rot in the basement.

There’s a natural “platform problem” here: whether you’re Classic or a Romantic, the platform you’re on means you will describe the other platform in disparaging terms. Romantics are “shallow and stupid”. Classics are “nerdy and elitist”. I’ve probably insulted half of you here, but doesn’t that kind of prove Persig’s hypothesis?

I’m a bit of a Classic, I think, and as such, I can’t help viewing Brexit as a function. It doesn’t matter what labels you apply to it. If you look below the surface at what you’re actually rejecting, rather than at what badge is applied to it, there’s a surprise in store.

I accept this doesn’t apply to everyone who voted Leave. Maybe only to a small minority. But given the narrowness of the vote, that percentage matters.

But in my Classic way, I can’t help concluding you didn’t vote to leave the EU at all, really. You only think you did. Given everything I’ve said about the yearning for what we used to be, everything we lost and want back, everything we blame on Europe without any justification, I have to conclude this:

In reality, you didn’t reject the dream of Europe we were all building.

You rejected the reality of a Britain you destroyed.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

22 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Please don't put words in my mouth angry, your mates on here do that often enough whilst pulling me up over spelling mistakes and reminding me how super de dupa intelligent they are.

 

As for your slur on siding with racists you're the one who thinks it fair that a white nurse from Poland gets preferential treatment to a black nurse from Ghana not me.

 

The report on the immigration figures i provided in the link a few posts above about immigration being underestimated for the EU whilst overstated for the rest of the world tells it's own story.

 

I said you're four-square with Salvini because, a few months ago, you were on this thread arguing in favour of his Government because they were in a disagreement with the EU over a budget. (You claimed it was because the EU were hell-bent on imposing austerity everywhere, but you refused to comment on the EU's support for the anti-austerity Government in Portugal.)

 

I accuse you of anti-Gypsy racism because of your racist posts in this thread just a few weeks ago. 

 

I accuse you of having a downer on immigrants, because you see a situation in which the freedom of workers to travel and work abroad is (in some - not all - cases) being abused by exploitative bosses to undercut the lowest-paid local workers and instead of attacking the exploiters and strengthening the rights of workers (both local and immigrant), you want to strip workers of their right to travel freely.  You come by a different route, but you've arrived at the same conclusion as the right-wingers and racists: that EU immigration is bad and the fact that it's been undercounted therefore makes a bad thing worse.

 

So, no, I haven't put any words in your mouth. Everything I've written about you is based directly on stuff that you've written on this thread. (Incidentally, you never answered my question: what is this EU job you've invented for me?)

 

As for your desperate attempt to find anything racist in my arguments, there are two important points you're missing: not all EU citizens are white; and you don't improve the rights of a worker from Ghana by removing rights from a Polish worker.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

27 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

You keep giving out this silly arguement about people siding with other people when you know it's not about that. Do you side with George Osborne, Nick Clegg Jess Phillips for example?  It's as lazy as calling someone a bigot

Gnasher: "Accusing someone of siding with someone else is silly".

 

Also Gnasher  "You lot love Macron and Rajoy and support their violence against protesters in Paris and Barcelona".

 

(Again, I'm not putting words in your mouth; I'm summarising what you have repeatedly posted in this thread.)

[AngryOfTuebrook]

33 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Now the real issue in your very last sentence is what it's at  It's where I disagree with you and probably the 95% of the posters your gang allow to post on this issue without ridicule. The free movement of labour is not the  workers utopia you like to paint, the evidence suggests otherwise, it's a pool of cheap labour on tap to be used and exploited. It's been very nicely dressed but the reality is even lower pay for immigrants who have already settled and the lowest paid faction of society; the last sentence is not my opinion angry it's a stone cold fact.

I don’t have a gang.

 

I have never suggested that free movement of labour is a utopia. On the contrary, I have repeatedly argued that it opens up opportunities for exploitation that need to be closed off: the way to do this is to strengthen the rights of workers, both local and immigrant. 

 

(Don't forget, of course, that for millions of workers throughout Europe - including myself, some of my friends and colleagues and some of the other posters here - the experience of travelling and working abroad has been a completely life-enhancing one, which earlier generations couldn't have dreamed of. Pretending that the impact of free movement of workers is wholly negative is just plain wrong.)

 

Your conclusion is that immigration is the problem and restricting the rights of workers to travel is the solution is, undeniably, shared by the right-wing of the Tory Party and all political views to the right of that. My conclusion that exploitation is the problem and strengthening workers' rights is the solution is opposed by neoliberals on both sides of the Brexit debate.

[Gnasher]

Angry, here is the POLICY by the Italians) that I supported. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45666160

 

IThe above was vetoed by the eu. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Angry, here is the POLICY by the Italians) that I supported. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45666160

 

IThe above was vetoed by the eu. 

I know what it was.

 

I also recognise that the far-right regime proposing it knew that it breached the obligations Italy had signed up to and that it was never a workable economic programme: it was intended solely to rally a nationalist mob.

 

You never showed any support for the practical and effective anti-austerity measures of the Government in Portugal.

 

Why is that? Is it because the Italian Government were rallying opposition to the EU (alongside their opposition to immigrants, refugees, minorities, etc.) while the Portuguese worked with the EU to improve the welfare of people in Portugal? This is where your obsessive opposition to the EU has led you: shoulder-to-shoulder with Fascists who are always the enemy of working people. 

[Gnasher]

17 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

I don’t have a gang.

 

I have never suggested that free movement of labour is a utopia. On the contrary, I have repeatedly argued that it opens up opportunities for exploitation that need to be closed off: the way to do this is to strengthen the rights of workers, both local and immigrant. 

 

(Don't forget, of course, that for millions of workers throughout Europe - including myself, some of my friends and colleagues and some of the other posters here - the experience of travelling and working abroad has been a completely life-enhancing one, which earlier generations couldn't have dreamed of. Pretending that the impact of free movement of workers is wholly negative is just plain wrong.)

 

Your conclusion is that immigration is the problem and restricting the rights of workers to travel is the solution is, undeniably, shared by the right-wing of the Tory Party and all political views to the right of that. My conclusion that exploitation is the problem and strengthening workers' rights is the solution is opposed by neoliberals on both sides of the Brexit debate.

Glad you and your mates had a good time angry,  (winners and losers ans all that) sadly for the poor in Europe the EU single market has been a fucking disaster.

 

Good read below I'd you're interested 

 

 

https://www.socialeurope.eu/poverty-and-inequality-in-europe

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

I know what it was.

 

I also recognise that the far-right regime proposing it knew that it breached the obligations Italy had signed up to and that it was never a workable economic programme: it was intended solely to rally a nationalist mob.

 

You never showed any support for the practical and effective anti-austerity measures of the Government in Portugal.

 

Why is that? Is it because the Italian Government were rallying opposition to the EU (alongside their opposition to immigrants, refugees, minorities, etc.) while the Portuguese worked with the EU to improve the welfare of people in Portugal? This is where your obsessive opposition to the EU has led you: shoulder-to-shoulder with Fascists who are always the enemy of working people. 

Are these the people I should be siding with angry ?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/15/european-commission-rebuked-jose-manuel-barroso-ex-chiefs-goldman-sachs-job

[AngryOfTuebrook]

8 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Glad you and your mates had a good time angry,  (winners and losers ans all that) sadly for the poor in Europe the EU single market has been a fucking disaster.

 

Good read below I'd you're interested 

 

 

https://www.socialeurope.eu/poverty-and-inequality-in-europe

Nothing in that article leads to the conclusion that the Single Market is part of the problem  (let alone "a fucking disaster"): on the contrary, it suggests how the EU should be the mechanism to address the problem. 

 

Inequality is aggravated by national governments choosing a policy of austerity.  The EU has been wrong to support and promote these policies. The article that you linked adds to the evidence (and, hopefully, political pressure) to persuade the new Commission and Parliament that a change of direction is long overdue. Who knows, maybe the waning influence of the one Member State that was always the chief promoter of austerity might help the citizens of the remaining EU nations.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Are these the people I should be siding with angry ?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/15/european-commission-rebuked-jose-manuel-barroso-ex-chiefs-goldman-sachs-job

 

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

 

You keep giving out this silly arguement about people siding with other people when you know it's not about that. 

 

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Nothing in that article leads to the conclusion that the Single Market is part of the problem  (let alone "a fucking disaster"): on the contrary, it suggests how the EU should be the mechanism to address the problem. 

 

Inequality is aggravated by national governments choosing a policy of austerity.  The EU has been wrong to support and promote these policies. The article that you linked adds to the evidence (and, hopefully, political pressure) to persuade the new Commission and Parliament that a change of direction is long overdue. Who knows, maybe the waning influence of the one Member State that was always the chief promoter of austerity might help the citizens of the remaining EU nations.

I didn't say the article was critical of the single market, I just thought it a good article which you or whoever might enjoy reading.

 

You have a valid point in your last paragraph  the UK has been s shitstain for years bit two wrongs do not make a right. I look at the government in France, Germany, Italy and the signs are not good.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Universities confirming something that I'd suspected: that the boycott of the S*n weakened the impact of anti-EU propaganda on Merseyside. 

 

Sun boycott on Merseyside reduced Euroscepticism https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/sun-boycott-on-merseyside-reduced-euroscepticism/26/08/

 

[magicrat]

Odd to think I maybe in a gang at my age. Do I get to ring doorbells and run away for a dare ?

[Lario]

Well all gangs are made up of dirty foreigners carrying knives, aren't they?!?

[magicrat]

1 minute ago, Lario said:

Well all gangs are made up of dirty foreigners carrying knives, aren't they?!?

Apparently not , some post Europhile heresy on internet forums 

[Gnasher]

9 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

I don’t have a gang.

 

I have never suggested that free movement of labour is a utopia. On the contrary, I have repeatedly argued that it opens up opportunities for exploitation that need to be closed off: the way to do this is to strengthen the rights of workers, both local and immigrant. 

 

(Don't forget, of course, that for millions of workers throughout Europe - including myself, some of my friends and colleagues and some of the other posters here - the experience of travelling and working abroad has been a completely life-enhancing one, which earlier generations couldn't have dreamed of. Pretending that the impact of free movement of workers is wholly negative is just plain wrong.)

 

Your conclusion is that immigration is the problem and restricting the rights of workers to travel is the solution is, undeniably, shared by the right-wing of the Tory Party and all political views to the right of that. My conclusion that exploitation is the problem and strengthening workers' rights is the solution is opposed by neoliberals on both sides of the Brexit debate.

You got a gang alllright angry and you know and use it.

 

10 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

 

I said you're four-square with Salvini because, a few months ago, you were on this thread arguing in favour of his Government because they were in a disagreement with the EU over a budget. (You claimed it was because the EU were hell-bent on imposing austerity everywhere, but you refused to comment on the EU's support for the anti-austerity Government in Portugal.)

 

I accuse you of anti-Gypsy racism because of your racist posts in this thread just a few weeks ago. 

 

I accuse you of having a downer on immigrants, because you see a situation in which the freedom of workers to travel and work abroad is (in some - not all - cases) being abused by exploitative bosses to undercut the lowest-paid local workers and instead of attacking the exploiters and strengthening the rights of workers (both local and immigrant), you want to strip workers of their right to travel freely.  You come by a different route, but you've arrived at the same conclusion as the right-wingers and racists: that EU immigration is bad and the fact that it's been undercounted therefore makes a bad thing worse.

 

So, no, I haven't put any words in your mouth. Everything I've written about you is based directly on stuff that you've written on this thread. (Incidentally, you never answered my question: what is this EU job you've invented for me?)

 

As for your desperate attempt to find anything racist in my arguments, there are two important points you're missing: not all EU citizens are white; and you don't improve the rights of a worker from Ghana by removing rights from a Polish worker.

Fucking hell angry cant you stop speaking with a forked toung and admit the current system gives  a head start to those in the eu at the detrement of those who are not in it? 

 

Its a simple fact. Your eu gang can lick your arse and give you silly little green arrows till the cows come home but the current system means if you are a nurse from Ghana you have less rights than a nurse from hungary. Thats a fact. In you and your followers  world its right in my world its not.

[Gnasher]

If you do not agree with the eu on here you get the margret hodge bullshit crew on your back. Thats how it seems.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

It’s Margaret.