I see what you mean, I wanted to make a difference between both because some people seem to think that EU rules are going to disappear after Brexit (The power to disobey laws), while others see the sovereignty as the power of actively do what you want (The power of making laws).
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I see what you mean, I wanted to make a difference between both because some people seem to think that EU rules are going to disappear after Brexit (The power to disobey laws), while others see the sovereignty as the power of actively do what you want (The power of making laws).
Eh?
Last edited:
Talk about distorting facts.Theresa May in today's PMQs said the vote to leave the EU was a vote to control immigration.
I think a small portion also thought that leaving would be better for the economy in the long run.
It was, among other things.
It was a central point.
My question is why leave voters get upset when that suggestion is made.
Aye, it was probably one of the two central points along with their desire to "make our own decisions".
What leavers mostly get annoyed at is people saying the vote was 80% about immigration or that leavers are nearly all racist. That's quite a leap.
Being worried about immigration is different from racism.
Back to my main point. The message from the government is that controls to immigration in the main factor in negotiations even if it's at the expense of the single market.
The government has interpreted the vote as that. Now, since leave voters are telling me immigration wasn't the most important reason for voting for leave, the government doesn't have any mandate for its negotiating position.
I think you've covered the main areas of focus, although i might describe them differently.
Immigration - The ability to regulate, and if necessary outright reduce the number of EU migrants entering the UK.
Trade/Britain's membership fee - The problems with TTIP, the signing of future trade deals where the EU presently struggles, our increasing financial contribution to an expanded and centralising EU.
Sovereignty - EU laws, ECJ, CFP, external affairs e.t.c.
To some degree these concerns could have been mitigated by a more nuanced approach on the part of Brussels, but such flexibility does not come naturally to them.
Nor does the EU or Holland or Merkal etc etc in that case. Unless we have votes on each line it has to be done by govt's who of course will have their own agendas.
The UK govt is pre-empting the EU negotiating stance by accepting that tariff free access to the single market is not possible without accepting free movement.
Since the UK voted to leave then free movement won't exist once we leave, it is the inherent consequence.
The question is will the EU accept the inherent consequence of its decision too.
Last edited:
And I disagree with every single point.
The trade part is ridiculous, the EU aren't struggling they are defending their interests while other countries like the US are doing the same, there is no reason for the EU to bend over.
It makes no sense, the EU are the ones who told you that you will have to accept that situation not the other way around. You are the ones who are saying that the EU is a bully because they refuse to separate free trade and free movement.
1. Yes, they do that a lot.
2. We listened and it appears we are willing to accept tariffs on our goods and services exported into the EU in order to separate ourselves from the EU. That is what you want right?
Why would Brussels give UK something that no other member has? UK has the deadline to re-negotiate the deals not EU, so any nuanced approach must come from UK tbh!
I wouldn't assume everyone is guilty of bad intentions so lock them out of my nation
The EU have had open borders for a long time, it hasn't happened here.
As far as negotiations go we are willing to give up everything for immigration controls
Again, i must clarify; although i warn you that we are in danger of agreeing on this.
Telling the US to sod off with regards to TTIP, is exactly the right response. Yet if the Greenpeace leak is to be believed, the EU (as opposed to Europe) was prepared to make unacceptable sacrifices to suit the Americans. I am most glad that the treaty is dead in the water. You misunderstand me: i was suggesting a more nuanced approach for the benefit of all its member states. And not merely as a reaction to Brexit, but what ought to have existed previously.
Again, i must clarify; although i warn you that we are in danger of agreeing on this.
Damn it, we agreed.
Again, i must clarify; although i warn you that we are in danger of agreeing on this.
This is a ridiculous point. The Brexiteers are way more likely to sign a crummy deal with the US to score a victory then the EU was ever likely to
maybe, but it would have been better if UK was spearheading this from the inside, in all fairness.
European citizens perhaps, or their national MPs, but i'd have my doubts about the EU as an institution. Vested interests and lobbyists are as much at home in Brussels as Westminster, more is the pity. So TTIP must be combatted in both places. There was a debate about it in the Commons not too many months ago, which was positive.
It would have to pass 27 vetos, it was very unlikely to happen
Liam Fox on the other hand will bend over for anything the yanks offer
And so it begins. Makes logical sense.
It amazes me how few people seem to realise that the price of everything is going to go up in the next few weeks and that there wages certainly won't! I expect price increases for all household and fuel products by the year end.
Welcome to #BrExit Britain...
Sooner we get rid of those immigrants the better.
No Marmites? We are witnessing Brexit's first success.
Except that Sterling/Euro rates have been in this ballpark before, and the sky didn't fall. I would also ask why other supermarkets aren't similarly embroiled.
Hammond's Autumn Statement in late-November could bring a steadying influence too, if the Chancellor is so inclined.
Hammond's Autumn Statement in late-November could bring a steadying influence too, if the Chancellor is so inclined.
You seemed quite happy when it rebounded briefly to €1.19.
Two more cents and it will the lowest level ever and it only rebounded from very close to that since yesterday because of what May said
The fall was to be expected and its negative effects limited up to now, however there was a more concerning plunge earlier this week. There is a point at which even i would see it as an issue you know. I do wonder if this above story is a problem is one unique to Tesco mind you.
As a Sainsbury's shareholder, things have not been pleasant for some time irrespective of Brexit.
As a Sainsbury's shareholder, things have not been pleasant for some time irrespective of Brexit.
The fall was to be expected and its negative effects limited up to now, however there was a more concerning plunge earlier this week. There is a point at which even i would see it as an issue you know. I do wonder if this above story is a problem is one unique to Tesco mind you.
As a Sainsbury's shareholder, things have not been pleasant for some time irrespective of Brexit.
Erm ... we've yet to leave the EU and all this has already happened.
When BrExit actually happens, the shit will hit the fan and the stuff on the other side will be very loose and very smelly.
Aren't you working for Unilever?
I used to for 11 years! I know the tesco CEO dave lewis quite well as he was at Unilever for 27 years and an ex boss!
So you know a thing or two about them, you think that brexit can be a problem for them?
Massive problem and on many levels. Unilever trades on London Stock Exchange. The sudden and unplanned for low value of £ impacts everything:
its raw material costs dramatically increase hence trying to force through price hikes to uk consumers.
Employing people in UK is now relatively more expensive. Eg: It would be cheaper to have many key executive posts based in Asia or even the US right now.
Cost of R&D within UK will increase dramatically. I'd imagine they willl divert more and more projects to their research centres in Netherlands, India and China.
Even cost of things like advertising production make no sense in UK when similar competence can be found outside.
In terms of free movement of European staff, that will massively reduce as BREXIT employment rules change. That reduction in cultural diversity and movement of human intellectual capital will also make costs increase. Also I'm sure EU membership allowed for UK manufacturing incentives which will now disappear and so make it unattractive to have those factories in UK.
For truly multinational British firms like Unilever, Shell and others, BrExit equates to a potential 2% impact on margins. The Only way to offset that is to take costs out of UK (fewer jobs) and pass on to the consumer.
Also indicative of the lunacy of BrExit: Unilever spent 20 years honing it's European supply chain and organisational structure to benefit from the EU. They now suddenly have to undo everything because some stupid idiots 'wanted their country back'. BrExit voters said they wanted to send a shock to Westminster. Well while the politicos faff around, the private sector has to do all the uncomfortable adjustment and UK people will end up losing whatever happens.
Scarily for me, this tesco/Unilever fall out is a microism of the entire impact on UK economy.
Last edited:
@sammsky1 Thanks, when I see that I realise that I underestimated the situation in some areas.
PS: If I'm not mistaken 2% is a lot isn't it?
PS: If I'm not mistaken 2% is a lot isn't it?
Unilever's EBTIDA Net margins are about 10-12%.
Yes, it's a c.15% impact on profits!!!!
Unilever reporting that this currency fluctuations could impact as much as 5% of global turnover.
And that makes them less competitive as they have less to invest in marketing so US firms like Procter and Gamble and Swiss firms like Nestlé can expect to gain market share, so making situation even worse in UK.
Last edited:
Inflation hurts the poorest most, you're probably not poor