0 Members and 12 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on October 31, 2018, 12:29:08 pmHerbertThat old canard keeps getting raised by Left supporters of Brexit. It's wrong. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/30/experts-reject-labour-leavers-argument-brussels-nationalisationI wonder why they keep banging on about it?BillyUnder EU rules, the U.K. cannot fully nationalise the railways. It can part nationalise them, but not fully. The management of the infrastructure and the rail services have to be completely separate. This is why, in my original post I said that wholesale renationalisation of the railways is forbidden. Additionally, EU rules dictate that any rail route that has spare capacity or additional time slots for new services must be open to any rail operator to purchase. These two rules mean that it’s impossible to create a unified and nationalised rail monopoly. Interestingly, the EU has for sometime held up the UK’s private rail system as the perfect example of a nationwide private rail provision and has encouraged other member states to follow suit. Also, I don’t believe anything that I read in the newspapers, whether it’s the Guardian or the Mail. They’ve all got their own agendas.
HerbertThat old canard keeps getting raised by Left supporters of Brexit. It's wrong. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/30/experts-reject-labour-leavers-argument-brussels-nationalisationI wonder why they keep banging on about it?
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on October 31, 2018, 04:26:59 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on October 31, 2018, 12:29:08 pmHerbertThat old canard keeps getting raised by Left supporters of Brexit. It's wrong. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/30/experts-reject-labour-leavers-argument-brussels-nationalisationI wonder why they keep banging on about it?BillyUnder EU rules, the U.K. cannot fully nationalise the railways. It can part nationalise them, but not fully. The management of the infrastructure and the rail services have to be completely separate. This is why, in my original post I said that wholesale renationalisation of the railways is forbidden. Additionally, EU rules dictate that any rail route that has spare capacity or additional time slots for new services must be open to any rail operator to purchase. These two rules mean that it’s impossible to create a unified and nationalised rail monopoly. Interestingly, the EU has for sometime held up the UK’s private rail system as the perfect example of a nationwide private rail provision and has encouraged other member states to follow suit. Also, I don’t believe anything that I read in the newspapers, whether it’s the Guardian or the Mail. They’ve all got their own agendas. If you're talking about that survey they did way back in 2013 - which is all I can find - it was a measure of consumer satisfaction not of the business modelling, and it also predated the rail chaos we've had in Britain since.Whatever it is you're referring to...doesn't the EU also have it's own agenda..but you believe them?
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on October 31, 2018, 04:26:59 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on October 31, 2018, 12:29:08 pmHerbertThat old canard keeps getting raised by Left supporters of Brexit. It's wrong. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/30/experts-reject-labour-leavers-argument-brussels-nationalisationI wonder why they keep banging on about it?BillyUnder EU rules, the U.K. cannot fully nationalise the railways. It can part nationalise them, but not fully. The management of the infrastructure and the rail services have to be completely separate. This is why, in my original post I said that wholesale renationalisation of the railways is forbidden. Additionally, EU rules dictate that any rail route that has spare capacity or additional time slots for new services must be open to any rail operator to purchase. These two rules mean that it’s impossible to create a unified and nationalised rail monopoly. Interestingly, the EU has for sometime held up the UK’s private rail system as the perfect example of a nationwide private rail provision and has encouraged other member states to follow suit. Also, I don’t believe anything that I read in the newspapers, whether it’s the Guardian or the Mail. They’ve all got their own agendas. Two words: Iarnród Éireann
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on October 31, 2018, 04:59:22 pmQuote from: Herbert Anchovy on October 31, 2018, 04:26:59 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on October 31, 2018, 12:29:08 pmHerbertThat old canard keeps getting raised by Left supporters of Brexit. It's wrong. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/30/experts-reject-labour-leavers-argument-brussels-nationalisationI wonder why they keep banging on about it?BillyUnder EU rules, the U.K. cannot fully nationalise the railways. It can part nationalise them, but not fully. The management of the infrastructure and the rail services have to be completely separate. This is why, in my original post I said that wholesale renationalisation of the railways is forbidden. Additionally, EU rules dictate that any rail route that has spare capacity or additional time slots for new services must be open to any rail operator to purchase. These two rules mean that it’s impossible to create a unified and nationalised rail monopoly. Interestingly, the EU has for sometime held up the UK’s private rail system as the perfect example of a nationwide private rail provision and has encouraged other member states to follow suit. Also, I don’t believe anything that I read in the newspapers, whether it’s the Guardian or the Mail. They’ve all got their own agendas. Two words: Iarnród ÉireannI hold my hands up and admit that I’m not 100% certain on this, but I believe that Ireland, along with a number other smaller EU member states, have been arguing that their rail networks are so small in comparison to larger nations, and consequently should be exempt from EU regulations. So, my argument still stands; as EU members the U.K. cannot fully nationalise it’s railway.
HerbertI'm happy to take your life e that EU membership precludes us from "fully" nationalising our rail network. So, are you saying that because we cannot fully nationalise our rail network, we should get a half-setter on a big long steel chain and repeatedly smash ourselves in the rest-of-the-economy b*llocks with it? Because that is precisely what leaving the SM and CU is going to feel like for the rest of the economy.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on November 01, 2018, 02:19:34 amHerbertI'm happy to take your life e that EU membership precludes us from "fully" nationalising our rail network. So, are you saying that because we cannot fully nationalise our rail network, we should get a half-setter on a big long steel chain and repeatedly smash ourselves in the rest-of-the-economy b*llocks with it? Because that is precisely what leaving the SM and CU is going to feel like for the rest of the economy.Billy The question that was asked was “what are the advantages of leaving the EU?” and I’ve shared one.
HA:''However, there is a much wider point here. The Argument for or against membership has become so aggressive and polarised. Fundamentally we now have two groups of people with opposing views shouting and screaming at each other without actually listening to the arguments of the other side. Consequently we find ourselves in the George W Bush scenario of “you’re either with us or against us”. ''All that is needed is two lists of verifiable facts and predictions from experts and those with cred about the pros and cons of staying or leaving. Leave out the personal reasons.I put my money on the staying list being infinitely longer, the not having government owned trains argument has already been lost.
HerbertI agree that the level of debate these days is frighteningly polarised. I don't accept that the blame lies equally on both sides. There has been a generation-long process on the Right to move away from evidence-based discussion towards where we are now, which is normalisation of outrageous lies. Yes the other side is not perfect, but there is no equivalence here. There is no one on the Left who comes remotely close to Bannon, or Trump, or Orban, or Farage or The Mail for constant, vicious lying.
HerbertYou chose a spectacularly bad example there. I suggest you go back and look specifically at what Clegg said. He wasn't calling CLAIMS that Juncker wanted an EU army "dangerous fantasies". He was calling Juncker's call for an EU army a dangerous fantasy. That is a perfect example of the political zeitgeist. The original meaning gets deliberately turned round to mean the precise opposite. And people buy it. And that approach comes I overwhelmingly from the Right. There was a perfect example in the US the other day. Nancy Pelosi was explainung how the Republican party works in partnership with right wing media to spread malicious false stories. Part of the video was taken deliberately out of context in a way that made it sound like she was explaining what SHE did to spread false stories. And it went viral with gullible people on social media being taken in and horrified that the Democrats could be so brazen. And as I say, it comes overwhelmingly from the Right. I'm sick of this "both sides are as bad as each other" argument. They aren't.
Why? We're leaving get over it
Quote from: Boomstick on November 01, 2018, 01:06:41 pmWhy? We're leaving get over it So you don't care that our country's democracy was bought by a foreign agent on behalf of a foreign power because you get to thumb your nose at the other side. I thought it was the lefties that were supposed to hate Britain?
I think Cameron and Osborne should be tried for treason, or should it be for idiocy.
Quote from: MachoMadness on November 01, 2018, 07:22:27 pmQuote from: Boomstick on November 01, 2018, 01:06:41 pmWhy? We're leaving get over it So you don't care that our country's democracy was bought by a foreign agent on behalf of a foreign power because you get to thumb your nose at the other side. I thought it was the lefties that were supposed to hate Britain?Quite amazing isn't it? These self-coloured patriots don't give a flying f**k about the evidence that a hostile power poured money into Leave.EU to get the specific result they wanted.With patriots like this, who needs enemies?
f**k me. Look what he's being referred for. https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1057969796552314880No evidence that the money he put into the Leave campaign was his. Allegations of criminal behaviour. This has massive implications for the Brexit situation.
96 pages and counting, look back and see if any leavers actually want to discuss facts or just want to distract and ignore direct questions, I think as the stayers have been supported by most if no all experts and business leaders with examinations of the leave case its myths and distortions that the leavers can have first go. Name a single credible reason for leaving that would advantage the majority (leave out your personal feelings/reasons puleeese)When that has been achieved it's the stayers turn.
Quote from: SydneyRover on November 01, 2018, 11:57:34 pm96 pages and counting, look back and see if any leavers actually want to discuss facts or just want to distract and ignore direct questions, I think as the stayers have been supported by most if no all experts and business leaders with examinations of the leave case its myths and distortions that the leavers can have first go. Name a single credible reason for leaving that would advantage the majority (leave out your personal feelings/reasons puleeese)When that has been achieved it's the stayers turn.SydneyI’ve already stated that one advantage of leaving the EU is that the UK will be able to nationalise the railways. Does this meet your criteria of “a single credible reason” for leaving? BTW, I’m not claiming to be Remain or Brexit, however claiming that there’s no positives to leaving is simply wrong. Whether they outweigh the advantages of remaining Areca different matter.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on November 01, 2018, 12:50:04 pmf**k me. Look what he's being referred for. https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1057969796552314880No evidence that the money he put into the Leave campaign was his. Allegations of criminal behaviour. This has massive implications for the Brexit situation. .Strange. I'd have expected Corbyn to be all over this story. Given that he was in favour of us Remaining, and campaigned so vigorously for us to Remain, I'd have expected him to.be incandescent to learn that a prominent Leave funder is facing a criminal investigation over that funding. But not a dickie bird from him. How odd.