Brexit and the Consequences

[counter_violent]

Isn't it more advantageous for a region like Cataluña to play the same game as the SNP? - always threatening independence but never achieving it?

Look at UKIP - as soon as they achieved what they wanted, independence from the EU, they were finished.

No Tom, re UKIP.

UKIP did a great job of exposing all that is wrong with the EU and indeed had a large hand in the leave vote outcome. Once the dust had settled and the voting public digested the outcome, then it was obvious that voters would switch to the party who picked up the batten. (cons)
Farage is UKIP and UKIP is Farage. If he does decide to pick up the batten once again, the voters will follow, I can assure you.

All of the politicians and political parties have and are continuing to blunder. Politically, they are all still reeling from the referendum vote and it must be the devils own job to get organised going forward. Everyone is having to take stock of the situation. All takes time, but it's time we can ill afford to waste.

 

[cantagril]

This goes to the crux of the problem, the same problem that the USA has identified. Globalisation, large economic protectionist blocks, businesses that think nothing of their civic responsibilities but are only concerned with the bottom line. Who needs this crap ! I certainly don't. This is no way for society to operate. It is unethical and those in power and in charge of large corporations are morally bankrupt.
People keep getting shafted by the system. We are at a turning point, what we need is political vision and more importantly, strong leadership.

I for one agree with you wholeheartedly. You are describing almost exactly what brought about the political upheaval in France. Macron rose without a trace almost overnight because enough people recognised that moral (and political) bankruptcy and that the turning not only had been reached but that they could do something because the knight in shining armour had already presented himself.

Sadly, this is not the case for the UK. Whether Macron ultimately fails or succeeds the UK does not have his equivalent (and it's definitely not Farage) so we might well understand that we are at a crossroads but the direction to take now is far from clear. The Brexit referendum farce merely makes a bad situation worse.

 

[counter_violent]

I for one agree with you wholeheartedly. You are describing almost exactly what brought about the political upheaval in France. Macron rose without a trace almost overnight because enough people recognised that moral (and political) bankruptcy and that the turning not only had been reached but that they could do something because the knight in shining armour had already presented himself.

Sadly, this is not the case for the UK. Whether Macron ultimately fails or succeeds the UK does not have his equivalent (and it's definitely not Farage) so we might well understand that we are at a crossroads but the direction to take now is far from clear. The Brexit referendum farce merely makes a bad situation worse.

The other parties have no candidates and I can think of only One candidate in the Tory party.
Rees Mogg. I think he has what it takes to present a clear vision and do what it takes to deliver a successful outcome.

 

[tomorton]

No Tom, re UKIP.

UKIP did a great job of exposing all that is wrong with the EU and indeed had a large hand in the leave vote outcome. Once the dust had settled and the voting public digested the outcome, then it was obvious that voters would switch to the party who picked up the batten. (cons)
Farage is UKIP and UKIP is Farage. If he does decide to pick up the batten once again, the voters will follow, I can assure you.

All of the politicians and political parties have and are continuing to blunder. Politically, they are all still reeling from the referendum vote and it must be the devils own job to get organised going forward. Everyone is having to take stock of the situation. All takes time, but it's time we can ill afford to waste.

UKIP campaigning for independence from the EU, 2015 - 3,800,000 votes
UKIP after winning independence from the EU - 600,000 votes.

The point is a minority party campaigning for independence has more political clout than one that has won it. This is why the SNP are cornered into a Never-endum campaign in Scotland.

 

[barjon]

The other parties have no candidates and I can think of only One candidate in the Tory party.
Rees Mogg. I think he has what it takes to present a clear vision and do what it takes to deliver a successful outcome.

Calling his baby Sixtus sort of shows which century his thinking resides in 😆

 

[counter_violent]

Calling his baby Sixtus sort of shows which century his thinking resides in 😆

Yep, you should see the names of the other 5 😆

 

[cantagril]

Calling his baby Sixtus sort of shows which century his thinking resides in 😆

By the same token you'd frown on me calling my cats Adolf and Attila?

That he has inherited a degree of privilege that's got him the education and manners of his class should not detract from any ability he might have. IMHO that's the same as damning someone who gets confused by the cutlery of formal dinner place settings. Social standing and class have nothing to do with ability and ethics.

No matter how he talks, how many children he has and whether he has to give them numbers because he's run out of imagination, If he's rubbish, he's rubbish and if he's not, he's not.🙂

....and I forgot: as a Catholic, Sixtus does make sense....ish

 

[Splitlink]

Hi Split',


Playing this through, if Cataluña were to vote for independence then, presumably, they wouldn't be part of the EU and would need to apply to join. As our man on the ground as it were, what impact do you think this might have on the rest of Spain and its relationship with the Brussels? In other words, is it probable/improbable that Cataluña's independence would be a trigger for Spain to hold her own referendum on staying in or getting out of the EU?
Tim.

As I understand it, Brussels ministers have warned, many times, that Cataluña would have to reapply for EU membership as Brussels only deals with central governments. Re-applying means go to the end of the queue-- if there is one-- and, then a veto from one member is all it takes to refuse membership. The coalition left and centre choose not to believe this will happen. Personally, I think it will!

As far as Madrid is concerned, I don't see any signs of wishing to break away from EU. Theresa May came to Madrid to speak to Rajoy. I think that they have cooked up something regarding vetos, Scotland and Cataluña.

Rajoy says that there will be no referendum while he is there because it is unconstitutional, and illegal. That is true. But tell me of any breakaway to independence from the central government, in the world, that was legal. That argument, IMO, is not valid.

That is all he says, at present. What is Madrid going to do? He, either, talks and finds a solution befopre October 1, or stops it physically. I think that the Catalans are equally divided, but as you know with Brexit, these refs and elections can be very close.

 

[Splitlink]

Isn't it more advantageous for a region like Cataluña to play the same game as the SNP? - always threatening independence but never achieving it?

Look at UKIP - as soon as they achieved what they wanted, independence from the EU, they were finished.

It is not Cataluña, Tom. It is indepentist left of centre ERC in coalition with two others.. They have a majority of one, or two seats.

Hopefully, the other parties will win the next election, if this ref fails. But, yes, that is the problem with refs. They can call for another one, later.

I think that Madrid is hoping that this will go away. I've lived here too long to be complacent about that. As Tim said,, unemployment is high and this is a younger man's move. Madrid wants to square the books at any cost. Much as Cameron and Osbourne wanted.

 

[dbphoenix]

All these referenda here and there and everywhere suggest that people don't understand what representative government is, or is supposed to be. If reps don't know what their constituents want, there is a problem that won't be solved by poll after poll and referendum after referendum.

 

[dbphoenix]

As Tim said,, unemployment is high and this is a younger man's move.

This has been brought up several times but as far as I know no one as yet has explained what it means. Is unemployment high because there are no jobs? Because there are jobs but nobody is qualified to fill them? Because there are jobs but nobody wants them? There are a number of reasons for unemployment, high or low, and more than a few possible solutions.

 

[Atilla]

Not so, Atilla. I've always lived here and Catalans are the salt of the earth.

It as been obvious to me, that Madrid could, and should, have got to the bottom of this decades ago, bur successive governments have swept it under the carpet.

How do you explain, for example, how Cataluña has a toll on its motorways while Madrld's motorways are free? Or that the Sevilla-Madrid Ave was the first to be built but that the Barcelona connection to to France has, yet to be completed?

You have to look at the economic argument rather than the personal one. Population density much higher for Barcelona compared to Madrid which is the capital and central to Spain. Thus, motorways far more important to head towards the capital. As they say all roads lead to Rome.

With respect to toll roads, they are best in areas of high density and congestion. So better suited to Barcelona than anywhere else based on this map.

Little things, but they needle Cataluña, along with much more. Cataluña and The Basque Country are the economic powerhouses of Spain. Cataluñas hands all the taxes over to Madrid and Madrid gives back what it thinks.

Yes and that's because textiles and steel production was based around here and it is also nearer the centre of Europe. Agriculture and rural areas always lag behind.

Then there is tourism. And then there is Mallorca and Ibiza as well as the French coast and ofcourse Monaco a short sail away in millionaires pond.



Now the problem has got to this stage. Unlike the Scottish one, which was legal, this one goes against the constitution. I don't like it. I don't want it, and I see unpleasantness ahead in one form, or another.

These are often more related to human geography and demographic factors. I don't see any ill gains here. Spain is made up of 7 different regions and forgive me if my perception is more about Catalonians wanting to keep their cake and eat it.

Much like London wanting to hog all the wealth having earnt it and demand an independent state to keep the loot.

This is the same all over the World. Simply put - greed. We have the rich South poor North divide in the UK. Italy has rich North and poor South. Same for Spain.

Is it not obvious???

Greedy sods playing political games about how hard up they are. Much like our Brexiters. Who think they contribute so much more to Europe as if they deserve more? People will follow lies if it promises to be in their interest.


Let's progress the scenario what if. If they do have their independence and EU accepts them, that's going to open the doors for all kinds of little greedy states wanting the same. Can you imagine EU reaching any agreement with 50,000 little states at the nth level.

No I don't think so! Find out who their political pooh stirrers are and feed'm to the sharks. :idea:

 

[Atilla]

Isn't it more advantageous for a region like Cataluña to play the same game as the SNP? - always threatening independence but never achieving it?

Look at UKIP - as soon as they achieved what they wanted, independence from the EU, they were finished.

Based on need of the country and distribution of wealth that's exactly what they've been doing yes absolutely. It's like sod the rest we want it all because we are fortunate enough to be blessed with finding our selves in this great part of the World.

How about the other 6 states of Spain unite, rage an offensive and deport them to the very hot and less industrial South. I'm sure they'll change their story then.

 

[Atilla]

This goes to the crux of the problem, the same problem that the USA has identified. Globalisation, large economic protectionist blocks, businesses that think nothing of their civic responsibilities but are only concerned with the bottom line. Who needs this crap ! I certainly don't. This is no way for society to operate. It is unethical and those in power and in charge of large corporations are morally bankrupt.
People keep getting shafted by the system. We are at a turning point, what we need is political vision and more importantly, strong leadership.

This is rubbish. UK and US were the champions of back then multi-nationals destroying local competition in the host countries they located in.

They would usurp cheap resources and factors of input whilst out competing local industries.

Then it was all about free and international trade.

Now the competition has caught up - hey presto Globalistation is the problemo. No it fecking ain't. Problem is US is finding it difficult to compete in manufacturing but way ahead in technology and high tech brands. However, the technology gap is also narrowing so they are squeaking. Same for UK.


You really need to get an education. Try reading some books. 😉

The other parties have no candidates and I can think of only One candidate in the Tory party.
Rees Mogg. I think he has what it takes to present a clear vision and do what it takes to deliver a successful outcome.

You not serious are you? He and Michael Gove and Boris will all lose election after election for the Tories. You need to get out more. They are all yesterdays men. Sooner confined to room 101 bin the better.

What a joke. 🙂 All useless POSs.

 

[dbphoenix]

"We are at a turning point, what we need is political vision and more importantly, strong leadership." All of which is just another way of saying "Somebody's got to do something!" Pointless. What exactly is this "political vision" that we need? Where exactly is this "strong leadership" supposed to take us?

Globalization per se is not the problem. The problem is lack of governance, lack of regulation, lack of oversight, lack of means of addressing grievances. The isolationism which the US and the UK seek is a giant step backwards. If the various factions can't find some way of working together, then we're done. Gene Roddenberry figured this out. But it's unlikely that the rest of us will do so before the US drags us into another war.

 

[Atilla]

"We are at a turning point, what we need is political vision and more importantly, strong leadership." All of which is just another way of saying "Somebody's got to do something!" Pointless. What exactly is this "political vision" that we need? Where exactly is this "strong leadership" supposed to take us?

Globalization per se is not the problem. The problem is lack of governance, lack of regulation, lack of oversight, lack of means of addressing grievances. The isolationism which the US and the UK seek is a giant step backwards. If the various factions can't find some way of working together, then we're done. Gene Roddenberry figured this out. But it's unlikely that the rest of us will do so before the US drags us into another war.

Agreed Db, when the cake is getting bigger even those who have less don't mind so much as they get a few more crumbs but when the cake starts getting smaller what's been happening is those who get more continue to do so but there is less of them and those who get less continue getting less but now there are more of them. Hence, back to skewed distribution of the cake in favour of those who are obese.

As you say I don't see this happening either. If people weren't prepared to distribute earnings fairly in good times, they are less likely to do it now.

As for regulation, big business owns Government. Look at Trump promising infrastructure spending on tax cuts.

Back to square one. City of London is against transaction tax. They are also against corporation tax. They are also in favour of reducing taxes. Then they accuse Labour's Corbyn of talking money treeeesssss.

Crazy the lot of'm. 😆

 

[Splitlink]

This has been brought up several times but as far as I know no one as yet has explained what it means. Is unemployment high because there are no jobs? Because there are jobs but nobody is qualified to fill them? Because there are jobs but nobody wants them? There are a number of reasons for unemployment, high or low, and more than a few possible solutions.

Hi, db. I don't know where to start.

I've said, time after time, on this site, that the basic problem is world population growth. They are all desperate to find work. The UK and Germany only had to mention that they had jobs to spare for there to be immigration on an uncontrollable scale to Europe..

Automation and the internet means that factories need fewer people and companies, like Ford, want to up sticks and go to Mexice, where labour is cheaper. Trump persuaded them not to. How, I don't know. But I bet that any new Ford factory in Mass.is going to run with less people.

Labour is being paid minimum wages in many cases and the quality of life for working class people is not as good as it used to be for them.

It is no good telling the unemployed the very valid reasons why work is unavailable. They want solutions that centre and right wing governments cannot give them without going further into debt.

That us why they want referenda and why left wing parties are promising them that everything will be different if they vote for independence.

A lot of the young, here, are living with their retired parents because they can't pay their own rent.

We live in a different age and, unlike you, I do not see a solution.

 

[dbphoenix]

The solution lies in changing the lens. You say they are all desperate to find work. Yet there is so much work that needs to be done that nobody seemingly wants to do. Your post is an excellent one in terms of outlining the challenges and what on the surface appear to be insoluble problems. But if one changes the lens, then finding the breadcrumb trail may not seem like the impossibility that at first it appeared to be.

There's plenty of work to do, yet it's all bound up in status and wages. What if everyone were required to work and status and wages were removed from the equation? One doesn't get very far with that without entering the realm of science fiction, but men have rewritten and re-rewritten and re-re-rewritten the social contract for millennia, usually using what they wrote the last time -- or what had been written by somebody else -- in order to come up with something "new". Rarely (I'm tempted to say "never") does anyone come up with anything truly different, truly new. Most consider the League of Nations to be a failure. The United Soviet Socialist Republic was a failure (though in some quarters you'd never know it). Many consider the United Nations to be a failure. Many consider the EU to be a failure. Does that mean that the impulse toward a world government in which no one can for example flee tax treatment they don't like or find cheaper labor or freedom from regulation is a doomed effort? If so, then one has only to look at the most logical destination on the road we're travelling. If that destination is unacceptable, then we must look at rewriting the social contract yet again. And we're running out of time to do so. Building walls may feel good, but it is a waste of whatever time we have left.

 

[timsk]

This has been brought up several times but as far as I know no one as yet has explained what it means. Is unemployment high because there are no jobs? Because there are jobs but nobody is qualified to fill them? Because there are jobs but nobody wants them? There are a number of reasons for unemployment, high or low, and more than a few possible solutions.

Hi dbp,
I'm happy to provide my take on this if you'd like me to but - unless you do, I won't bother - for two reasons. Firstly, my answer is just my opinion and, therefore, one you're unlikely to agree with. Secondly, it's not particularly relevant. By that I mean the reasons for high unemployment are what they are and, what should or could be done to reduce it (assuming that reducing it is a worthwhile goal), largely boils down to each person's political hue. I say potato - you say potato etc. That said, slice 'n dice it any way you like, the bottom line remains the same, which is that the unemployed are broke and they aren't happy about it. Not happy at all. There may well be solutions as you suggest, but if the state doesn't implement them to bring the numbers down, then the likely consequence is civil unrest. And if that happens, then the unemployed and the state alike will look for someone to blame. At which point, rightly or wrongly, the spotlight will be trained on the EU and the Euro. Fundamentals questions will be asked as to whether they fuel unemployment or help to reduce it. Needless to say, you can guess my answer to that!
Tim.

 

[dbphoenix]

But this is all circular. "The reasons for high unemployment are what they are": what exactly does that mean? "There may well be solutions but if the state doesn't implement them to bring the numbers down down, then the likely consequence is civil unrest": what solutions are there for the state to implement? The consequences of implementation will depend in part on what solutions are proposed to begin with, much less how they are implemented.

This is all much bigger than the EU and the Euro and the UK, and a solution won't be found in an ever-narrowing POV.