The Gooner Forum

Allgunsblazin wrote:

nut flush gooner wrote:

Allgunsblazin wrote:

Herd wrote:The only market nut flush knows about is the one he buys his fruit n veg at . He fails to tell you the reason why the pound has fallen so much in the last 10 years . Interest rates . The moron that was gordon brown brought them down to zero and the pound promptly dropped like a stone . forcing people into spending their money in other ways. the effect has been catastrophic and has directly led to the impovershment of large sections of the population. The ridiculous hong kong style property boom has meant that the very rich have got richer and made slaves of the rest of us. when i bought my first house in 1984 i was 26 and its price was twice my salary . the young guys in my office that i train are the same age live in rented accomadation which they share with 3 or 4 others and dont have a hope in hell of getting a house or flat as it would be 20 times their salary. they pay 50 pct of their salary for this privelege. thats fucked up but thens so is this country. staying in europe will only dragged is further into the quagmire.

Any nation or remoaner that throws good money after bad needs their head examined as in the Greek Tragedy, come on, it's economics innit peeps!..

What has the Greeks got to do with us? Their economy is totally different, they paid their public servants ridiculous pensions from the age of 50. Are you or anyone else surprised the pack of cards came down.....

But yet again another irrelevant part of Britain being in the EU. There is no comparison, we didn't even bail them out.

I was beginning to think you knew what you were talking about, but along with your Euro Sir John Falstaffs in a rendition of Henry IV your buffoonish behaviours in the Greek bail out was crazy to say the least.
The argument is would you throw good money away after bad?....

Allgunsblazin wrote:

Chippy wrote:

Allgunsblazin wrote:Unilever made a quick uturn then, the main Supermarkets were all gonna give them the Spanish Archer, glad to see that common sense has prevailed in the end....

Doubt that very much. No business, not even Unilever can sustain a 20% drop in revenue. We are in for a major bout of inflation.

Supermarkets call the shots, anyway watch Lidl expand with their lookie likies.....

Chippy wrote:Anyway, it looks like Dublin is set to do well because of Brexit.

https://t.co/Lqzekskc8A

DB10GOONER wrote:

Chippy wrote:Anyway, it looks like Dublin is set to do well because of Brexit.

https://t.co/Lqzekskc8A

Just what Dublin needs - more scumbag bankers!

flash gunner wrote:"Brexit will be a disaster for UK science". Meanwhile non-EU Switzerland, Israel and Japan are world leaders in science.

Red Snapper wrote:

flash gunner wrote:"Brexit will be a disaster for UK science". Meanwhile non-EU Switzerland, Israel and Japan are world leaders in science.

One question I can't seem to get answered is why Switzerland have withdrawn their application to join the EU.

Whatever the merits of Unilver’s attempted 10 per cent price hike on Marmite and hundreds of other product lines – and the effort by Tesco, heroes for once, to resist – it is a taste of much worse things to come. For a nation that imports so much – too much, indeed – a rise in the cost of things we take in from abroad is inevitable. Sometimes retailers can try to offset it, as here. And for many goods it should take some more months yet to feel the full effects (Unilever’s price rise looks suspiciously quick for a product so locally sourced as Marmite), but the squeeze will come – and plenty more pain besides.

The Swiss parliament has largely caved in to EU intransigence on free movement in a decision that could deal a blow to British government hopes of being able to both control immigration and retain enhanced single market access after Brexit.

Brits could find themselves with the short end of the stick if and when the UK leaves the European bloc. As the think-tank Bruegel has pointed out, because Switzerland is not part of the EU, the Swiss currently pay one of the highest rates in Europe for data roaming. “It appears that the UK will shortly find itself in the same position,” Bruegel senior fellow J. Scott Marcus wrote in June.

DB10GOONER wrote:

Chippy wrote:Anyway, it looks like Dublin is set to do well because of Brexit.

https://t.co/Lqzekskc8A

Just what Dublin needs - more scumbag bankers!

nut flush gooner wrote:

DB10GOONER wrote:

Chippy wrote:Anyway, it looks like Dublin is set to do well because of Brexit.

https://t.co/Lqzekskc8A

Just what Dublin needs - more scumbag bankers!

Dublin is the perfect fit for the American banks, you both speak English with a funny accent.

Seriously though the language aside having passporting rights will put Dublin at a distinct advantage. It would also be quite easy for the senior staff in London, to commute to Dublin Mon-Fri and come back here for the weekend.

The benefit to the Irish economy would be huge and it would reignite your property market. I would say that after a hard decade the prospects for the Irish economy are looking good, albeit at the UK's expense. It's very tempting to look at Irish real estate again, I have been looking at a few commercial property funds.

As in a bad dream, I have the sensation of falling. We British are on our way to making the biggest screw-up since Suez and, somewhere deep down, the new governing class know it. We are heading for national humiliation, nobody’s in charge, and nobody knows what to do. This Brexit thing is out of control.

It was really only this week that the scales fell from my eyes. Perhaps it was just the accretion of small observations, mounting in the unconscious mind until the heap broke the surface: but a nascent worry became a conscious horror. For me the horror dawned after a long discussion in a group who follow politics closely. Reading the runes, we were trying to work out — and only in broad outline — what the plan for Brexit might be. Scenarios were conjured, possible game-plans stress-tested.

But every guess, followed through, led fast into the nettles. As the dial moved towards the “soft” end of the spectrum of possibilities we repeatedly faced the tiger that the Leave camp so foolishly and cynically rode: immigration. Why ever would our EU partners offer us, post-Brexit, what they would not offer David Cameron before?

And what makes anyone think that in the new antagonisms generated across the Channel by our referendum result, the “soft” Brexit that we former Remainers crave will anyway still be on offer?

And as the dial moved towards the “hard” end of the spectrum, the massive economic uncertainties attached to the go-it-alone solution came crowding in. None of us knew how realistic the fears of a serious hit to Britain’s economy might prove: but we did know that for many in the Leave camp, and for the chancellor of the exchequer, those fears were real.

Then we thought about parliament. But when you do, the path of legislative scrutiny crumbles beneath your feet. Before she triggers Article 50 next March (and therefore before negotiations even begin) Theresa May is adamant she cannot show parliament her hand, and one does see her point — even though John Major did risk a Commons debate before he went to Maastricht. But after Article 50 is triggered and the Lisbon treaty’s ejector button has been pushed, reversing the process is practically impossible.

After March, parliament can say it doesn’t like the Brexit plan that emerges, it can amend the Great Repeal Bill by attaching conditions, it can even throw the bill out; but still we must leave the EU within two years — and on no terms at all if parliament rejects the government’s terms.

Besides, a darker possibility occurs: that the real reason Mrs May doesn’t want to consult parliament on her plans is that she doesn’t have any.

Bayonet the wounded all you like, Leavers, but the nation waits to hear your plans
It was widely felt that the referendum would be a crystalline moment of national decision. We were to stay on one road or take the other. Yet nearly four months later we find ourselves still at the crossroads, arguing about why we decided to take the road less travelled — and where it should lead. The referendum’s sense of purpose has evaporated and we can see what always lay beneath: competing visions for Britain, each unable to command a majority by itself. They were pooled in the word Leave, and it took them as far as June 23.

But no further. The differences now within the Brexit camp are at least as sharp as between them and some of the former Remainers. Some of the veteran and most stalwart campaigners against the EU — Daniel Hannan MEP; columnists such as Christopher Booker, Andrew Lilico and Iain Martin — are prominent among those growing queasy about where Brexit could lead.

And from Mrs May herself? Silence. Allow me to switch the gender in my take on Benny Hill’s parody of a faux-heroic Edwardian poem:

They said it couldn’t be done;

They said she could never do it.

So she took that job that couldn’t be done —

And she couldn’t do it.

Several of us emerged from that discussion among pundits this week, each with our own perspective, but all with the same response. We were looking at a very serious impending road accident. “What the ****?” we were saying to each other. The scales, as I say, fell from my eyes.

For my friend, Times colleague and Leave campaigner, Michael Gove, to spend every paragraph — yes, every paragraph — of his column yesterday railing against the side that lost the European referendum campaign attests more eloquently to suppressed panic than anything we the vanquished could write. Edvard Munch’s The Scream hovered over his words.

The Freudians call it displacement activity, and it tells us so much. To our intense disquiet we find the victors, hollow-cheeked, still stalking the battlefield, kicking irritably at corpses, months after their war was won.

Bayonet the wounded all you like, Leavers, but the nation waits to hear your plans. You have the baton. Where are you going to run?

Blaming The Guardian, blaming The Times, blaming fat British businessmen, blaming golf, Marmite, Japanese car bosses and the governor of the Bank of England, lashing out at the “doom-mongers” and “naysayers”, the “international bankers” who would “talk our country down”, as though the strong fundamentals of “the world’s fifth-largest economy” that you promised would power us easily through are now candles in the wind, snuffable by a handful of weedy newspaper columnists . . . blaming everyone and everything but your own lack of an agreed plan, is futile.

Yes, we Remainers lost the referendum. Yes, we messed up the campaign. Yes, we failed to understand public discontent. Yes, we concede that you are now the pilots.

The initiative is yours. We await your proposals and we accept your right — even (as I have written) your duty — to proceed with them. But we want to know what they are. How do you plan to make this thing work? Michael Gove began his column with three short sentences: “Take. Back. Control.” I can reply with one: “How?” Or perhaps in the same vein: “What. Are. You. Going. To. Do?”

We ask because the suspicion grows that none of you has the foggiest. And if that’s true then you have betrayed the trust of 17 million people who thought you knew. Before the referendum you assumed the mantle of “us” in a revolt against “them” and profited mightily from that assumption. But now you’re in charge. You’re not Us any more: you’re Them, the new Establishment, the powers that be. You are the experts we were enjoined to scorn. So scream — because the people’s anger will be terrible.

Herd wrote: