Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:57:53 am

Login with username, password and session length

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: The cost of Brexit  (Read 9862 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

scawsby steve

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 7707
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #180 on October 16, 2021, 08:16:45 pm by scawsby steve »
this has to be a positive, it will sure help with the government's effort to clean up the mess

''Deeside: New toilet paper factory could create 460 jobs''

''A new factory making toilet paper, tissues and kitchen roll could create up to 460 new jobs.

Italian-based manufacturer ICT is planning to build a new paper mill on the Deeside Industrial estate, in Flintshire.

The company has asked for the public's views on the move ahead of submitting a planning application''

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-58923540

That sounds like a tissue of lies to me.



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

KeithMyath

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 150
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #181 on October 17, 2021, 09:51:33 am by KeithMyath »
this has to be a positive, it will sure help with the government's effort to clean up the mess

''Deeside: New toilet paper factory could create 460 jobs''

''A new factory making toilet paper, tissues and kitchen roll could create up to 460 new jobs.

Italian-based manufacturer ICT is planning to build a new paper mill on the Deeside Industrial estate, in Flintshire.

The company has asked for the public's views on the move ahead of submitting a planning application''

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-58923540

In the current climate, it’s not to be sneezed at.   

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 13582
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #182 on October 17, 2021, 10:01:30 pm by SydneyRover »
On a bit of a roll there guys!

albie

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3611
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #183 on October 18, 2021, 04:24:08 pm by albie »
Whatever the final cost of Brexit turns out to be, there is a clear record of misinformation from Coco the Clown.
Here is an edit of some choice cuts;
https://youtu.be/8cDNVQAzeyE

We are now in the position where pathological lies are the common currency of government.
This is no longer hidden, as in the past.

It is upfront and boast-worthy....vote for me and be misled, you won't be disappointed!

Sprotyrover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3990
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #184 on October 18, 2021, 04:46:01 pm by Sprotyrover »
What happened to good old Sheffield finest toilet paper factory IZAL
The source of many toilet paper mishap stories, rough as Sandpaper on one side and as slippery as Black ice on the other. Caused many an overshoot on wiping upwards!

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 13582
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #185 on October 18, 2021, 10:46:17 pm by SydneyRover »
Cost of brexit, when miners attained a better wage the answer was to import cheaper coal as locally mined coal was presumably a luxury.

To achieve the promised nirvana this government's intention is to sign more trade deals, import more and more cheaper goods along with the reasonably new idea of high tech, high wage thingy.

What will the UK be able to trade as a balance in these negotiations with those countries that make these cheaper goods and how long will this 'transition' take, how long will it take to change the whole (yes whole, think of levelling up) of Britain to 'retool' into a high tech economy?

Added

And who will do the 'shit jobs' will this spawn more of an underclass of low wage on-call army.

The government has so far rejected the idea of a living wage as it cancels the £20 quid that those on the bottom rungs have been making merry with, trying to force them into the available jobs that no one really wants to do.

Is the blue print what we see now being rolled out?

High tech high wages for a lower upper class with those that can't quite make it scrambling for crumbs as cheap imports trash their jobs. Going back to live-in housekeepers and cooks.



« Last Edit: October 18, 2021, 11:19:04 pm by SydneyRover »

belton rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2883
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #186 on October 19, 2021, 09:05:03 am by belton rover »
this has to be a positive, it will sure help with the government's effort to clean up the mess

''Deeside: New toilet paper factory could create 460 jobs''

''A new factory making toilet paper, tissues and kitchen roll could create up to 460 new jobs.

Italian-based manufacturer ICT is planning to build a new paper mill on the Deeside Industrial estate, in Flintshire.

The company has asked for the public's views on the move ahead of submitting a planning application''

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-58923540

In the current climate, it’s not to be sneezed at.   

Snot what we voted for.

Herbert Anchovy

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1977
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #187 on October 19, 2021, 11:00:37 am by Herbert Anchovy »
Cost of brexit, when miners attained a better wage the answer was to import cheaper coal as locally mined coal was presumably a luxury.

To achieve the promised nirvana this government's intention is to sign more trade deals, import more and more cheaper goods along with the reasonably new idea of high tech, high wage thingy.

What will the UK be able to trade as a balance in these negotiations with those countries that make these cheaper goods and how long will this 'transition' take, how long will it take to change the whole (yes whole, think of levelling up) of Britain to 'retool' into a high tech economy?

Added

And who will do the 'shit jobs' will this spawn more of an underclass of low wage on-call army.

The government has so far rejected the idea of a living wage as it cancels the £20 quid that those on the bottom rungs have been making merry with, trying to force them into the available jobs that no one really wants to do.

Is the blue print what we see now being rolled out?

High tech high wages for a lower upper class with those that can't quite make it scrambling for crumbs as cheap imports trash their jobs. Going back to live-in housekeepers and cooks.

It’s worth remembering too that in the early 90’s when the Government were closing mines en masse, the EEC and then the EU were fully supportive (and probably actively encouraged) of this policy. They saw the purchase and importing of coal from Eastern Europe as a ‘shoe in’ to help the economies of these countries strengthen to the point where EU membership would become a viable option to them.

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 13582
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #188 on October 19, 2021, 11:55:59 am by SydneyRover »
Thanks HA

''It’s worth remembering too that in the early 90’s when the Government were closing mines en masse, the EEC and then the EU were fully supportive (and probably actively encouraged) of this policy. They saw the purchase and importing of coal from Eastern Europe as a ‘shoe in’ to help the economies of these countries strengthen to the point where EU membership would become a viable option to them.''


Here's a few of the good things to come out of the EU

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history_en

Our own governments legislated to stop burning coal in homes from around the 1960s I think, with good reason.

''Western Europe's Long Retreat from Coal and Implications for Energy Trade
Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2020''

''Western Europe's industrialization was powered largely by coal. Within 15 years after the end of the Second World War, however, governments were subsidizing coal and protecting producers from foreign competition while allowing their industries to contract in a way that avoided large-scale unemployment of miners. The oil-price shocks of 1973–1974 and 1979–1980 gave temporary reprieve to hard-coal production until international oil prices slumped in 1986. This event, combined with ever more stringent environmental regulations and, later, caps on carbon-dioxide emissions, led to the disappearance of subsidized coal mining in one country after another. As of the end of 2019, hard coal was still being mined – in small amounts – in only three Western European countries: Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom. This paper describes the history of the industry from 1945 through to the present, and the consequences of subsidy policy for trade in hard coal and its substitutes. A common observation is that a reduction in subsidized coal production by a country has not necessarily translated into increased imports of coal on a one-for-one basis.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-trade-review/article/abs/western-europes-long-retreat-from-coal-and-implications-for-energy-trade/1F6BAD3033F3C0ABFAA66DF703D06D10

Added: Germany was producing coal until 2018
« Last Edit: October 19, 2021, 12:02:57 pm by SydneyRover »

ravenrover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 9511
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #189 on October 19, 2021, 12:32:43 pm by ravenrover »
Cost of brexit, when miners attained a better wage the answer was to import cheaper coal as locally mined coal was presumably a luxury.

To achieve the promised nirvana this government's intention is to sign more trade deals, import more and more cheaper goods along with the reasonably new idea of high tech, high wage thingy.

What will the UK be able to trade as a balance in these negotiations with those countries that make these cheaper goods and how long will this 'transition' take, how long will it take to change the whole (yes whole, think of levelling up) of Britain to 'retool' into a high tech economy?

Added

And who will do the 'shit jobs' will this spawn more of an underclass of low wage on-call army.

The government has so far rejected the idea of a living wage as it cancels the £20 quid that those on the bottom rungs have been making merry with, trying to force them into the available jobs that no one really wants to do.

Is the blue print what we see now being rolled out?

High tech high wages for a lower upper class with those that can't quite make it scrambling for crumbs as cheap imports trash their jobs. Going back to live-in housekeepers and cooks.

It’s worth remembering too that in the early 90’s when the Government were closing mines en masse, the EEC and then the EU were fully supportive (and probably actively encouraged) of this policy. They saw the purchase and importing of coal from Eastern Europe as a ‘shoe in’ to help the economies of these countries strengthen to the point where EU membership would become a viable option to them.
It's also worth remembering that many tonnes of imported coal came from South America, South Africa and Australia not just Europe

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36604
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #190 on October 19, 2021, 01:47:57 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
Cost of brexit, when miners attained a better wage the answer was to import cheaper coal as locally mined coal was presumably a luxury.

To achieve the promised nirvana this government's intention is to sign more trade deals, import more and more cheaper goods along with the reasonably new idea of high tech, high wage thingy.

What will the UK be able to trade as a balance in these negotiations with those countries that make these cheaper goods and how long will this 'transition' take, how long will it take to change the whole (yes whole, think of levelling up) of Britain to 'retool' into a high tech economy?

Added

And who will do the 'shit jobs' will this spawn more of an underclass of low wage on-call army.

The government has so far rejected the idea of a living wage as it cancels the £20 quid that those on the bottom rungs have been making merry with, trying to force them into the available jobs that no one really wants to do.

Is the blue print what we see now being rolled out?

High tech high wages for a lower upper class with those that can't quite make it scrambling for crumbs as cheap imports trash their jobs. Going back to live-in housekeepers and cooks.

It’s worth remembering too that in the early 90’s when the Government were closing mines en masse, the EEC and then the EU were fully supportive (and probably actively encouraged) of this policy. They saw the purchase and importing of coal from Eastern Europe as a ‘shoe in’ to help the economies of these countries strengthen to the point where EU membership would become a viable option to them.

That really doesn't tally with the facts.

The vast bulk of closures had already happened while Poland was still Communist. Communism didn't fall in Poland until the end of 1989. By then there were only 50,000 people employed in the UK coal industry, down from 250,000 in 1980.

Blaming the demise of the UK coal industry on a nefarious imperial EU plan is way off the mark.

Herbert Anchovy

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1977
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #191 on October 19, 2021, 04:02:09 pm by Herbert Anchovy »
Cost of brexit, when miners attained a better wage the answer was to import cheaper coal as locally mined coal was presumably a luxury.

To achieve the promised nirvana this government's intention is to sign more trade deals, import more and more cheaper goods along with the reasonably new idea of high tech, high wage thingy.

What will the UK be able to trade as a balance in these negotiations with those countries that make these cheaper goods and how long will this 'transition' take, how long will it take to change the whole (yes whole, think of levelling up) of Britain to 'retool' into a high tech economy?

Added

And who will do the 'shit jobs' will this spawn more of an underclass of low wage on-call army.

The government has so far rejected the idea of a living wage as it cancels the £20 quid that those on the bottom rungs have been making merry with, trying to force them into the available jobs that no one really wants to do.

Is the blue print what we see now being rolled out?

High tech high wages for a lower upper class with those that can't quite make it scrambling for crumbs as cheap imports trash their jobs. Going back to live-in housekeepers and cooks.

It’s worth remembering too that in the early 90’s when the Government were closing mines en masse, the EEC and then the EU were fully supportive (and probably actively encouraged) of this policy. They saw the purchase and importing of coal from Eastern Europe as a ‘shoe in’ to help the economies of these countries strengthen to the point where EU membership would become a viable option to them.

That really doesn't tally with the facts.

The vast bulk of closures had already happened while Poland was still Communist. Communism didn't fall in Poland until the end of 1989. By then there were only 50,000 people employed in the UK coal industry, down from 250,000 in 1980.

Blaming the demise of the UK coal industry on a nefarious imperial EU plan is way off the mark.

Billy,

Read my post again. I’ve not claimed, suggested nor hinted that the demise of UK coal was “a nefarious EU plan”. I’ve also made clear that I’m referring to closures that occurred during the early 90’s.

During the pit closure programme of the Major Government, the EEC/EU were fully supportive of the process and helped to facilitate negotiations between the UK and Eastern European countries regarding the import of coal. This was widely reported at the time in the media, included in a TV documentary and also mentioned in Parliament by a number of Labour MP’s who’s constituents were affected.

Were the EEC/EU responsible for UK pit closures in the 90’s? No
We’re the EEC/EU supportive of the UK government policy of pit closures? Absolutely
« Last Edit: October 19, 2021, 04:09:01 pm by Herbert Anchovy »

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36604
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #192 on October 19, 2021, 04:28:55 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
HA
Apologies if I didn't make it clear what I meant and if I read more into your post than I should have done. In my defence, you were saying the EU "probably" supported our pit closures as an aid to getting Eastern European countries ready for EU membership, so maybe you can see why I read it the way I did?

In the context of this thread, my point is: Would the pit closures have gone ahead if the EC/EU hadn't existed at the time?

And there is the follow-up question: Once the pit closures had occurred and UK mining areas were devastated, would a UK Govt outside the EU have invested as much money in the likes of South Yorkshire and South Wales as the EU did?

Herbert Anchovy

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1977
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #193 on October 19, 2021, 05:31:43 pm by Herbert Anchovy »
HA
Apologies if I didn't make it clear what I meant and if I read more into your post than I should have done. In my defence, you were saying the EU "probably" supported our pit closures as an aid to getting Eastern European countries ready for EU membership, so maybe you can see why I read it the way I did?

In the context of this thread, my point is: Would the pit closures have gone ahead if the EC/EU hadn't existed at the time?

And there is the follow-up question: Once the pit closures had occurred and UK mining areas were devastated, would a UK Govt outside the EU have invested as much money in the likes of South Yorkshire and South Wales as the EU did?

Fair enough Billy. Maybe I could have worded my post better.

Would the pit closures have gone ahead without EU support? Of course they would. However it helps to understand how and why many people from these communities question the benefits of EU when they saw them supporting the Tories hatchet job (because that’s exactly what it was) of their livelihoods.

Your second point is a more rhetorical question. Who knows? It’s a little known fact that the UK government had no say in where EU funding was distributed in the country. Is it better that our own government make this decision rather than the EU? Do I trust the Tories or the EU? Neither to be honest.

As an interesting side point, not long after the referendum I watched a news report from Ebbw Vale which had voted to leave by a large majority…and yet was the largest small town recipient of EU funds in the country. Interestingly the report was positioned as an exam of the failure of the Remain campaign to communicate the benefits of EU membership clearly enough rather than an opportunity to brand leave voters as idiots (though that would come soon enough). Consequently I now keep half an eye on what goes on economically in that town as an unscientific barometer of whether people are benefiting or not. Sad man that I am!

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36604
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #194 on October 19, 2021, 06:09:55 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
HA.

This EU that you don't trust. If we hadn't left the EU, they were going to chuck €3bn at South Yorkshire. Paid for by rich European tax payers. Do you think any Tory Govt in history would have ever so much as thought of doing that?

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: The cost of Brexit
« Reply #195 on October 19, 2021, 06:15:35 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
The EU 'supported' the pit closures?

What did you expect them to do, try and stop a UK government from doing what they wanted to do?

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012