The Politics Thread

[jaffka]

The part on her cv that states her sex

[Hoboh]

I thought you had gone and could not be doing with communicating with idiots.
I'm sorry if you feel I was getting a touch personal but you do have a way with words and the odd turn of phrase from time to time.
Okay lets try to answer your question
I had never heard of her, I doubt you had and I also doubt 99% of the members of this forum have either, yet this is a person who represents a political body you and others seem happy to support, a person who upon reading her cv I question just what is her experience to justify a hell of a lot of member states taxpayers money.
BTW the vans black

So let's get this straight. You're having a pop at someone you don't know, based on what they earn, against a CV you've not seen (you quoted at best a small précis). I suspect you have no idea about what she does either. There's lots of people I haven't heard of earn money. Looking through, I see most of your ammunition seems to have emanated from the Daily Mail. Great! it must be on the money.

Just for you're own personal edification, she believes that it's wrong that 10 EU countries get 90% of the Asylum requests and believes the other 17 should get more and in a better proportion - I'd have thought you'd have been supportive of that.

Which part of her CV suggests to you, she's unsuitable for the job she does? Tell us, please do - feel free to point out specifically which parts of her job she can't do, because of her CV.

OK Mr Pro Europe Just for you're own personal edification the cv is from HER OWN PROFILE in the official EU site, look it up if you want.
I'm having a pop because she is a non entity sticking her EU nose into a UK debate about Europe, you know just like similar EU officials sticking their noses in and almost bringing parts of Europe to war!
You Europhiles should start putting some facts up about what the feck Europe does for us instead of just bleating when it gets knocked, fact is YOU have no case so all you can be is negative.

[Hoboh]

The part on her cv that states her sex

Whats that got to do with anything?

[Worthy4England]

I thought you had gone and could not be doing with communicating with idiots.
I'm sorry if you feel I was getting a touch personal but you do have a way with words and the odd turn of phrase from time to time.
Okay lets try to answer your question
I had never heard of her, I doubt you had and I also doubt 99% of the members of this forum have either, yet this is a person who represents a political body you and others seem happy to support, a person who upon reading her cv I question just what is her experience to justify a hell of a lot of member states taxpayers money.
BTW the vans black

So let's get this straight. You're having a pop at someone you don't know, based on what they earn, against a CV you've not seen (you quoted at best a small précis). I suspect you have no idea about what she does either. There's lots of people I haven't heard of earn money. Looking through, I see most of your ammunition seems to have emanated from the Daily Mail. Great! it must be on the money.

Just for you're own personal edification, she believes that it's wrong that 10 EU countries get 90% of the Asylum requests and believes the other 17 should get more and in a better proportion - I'd have thought you'd have been supportive of that.

Which part of her CV suggests to you, she's unsuitable for the job she does? Tell us, please do - feel free to point out specifically which parts of her job she can't do, because of her CV.

OK Mr Pro Europe Just for you're own personal edification the cv is from HER OWN PROFILE in the official EU site, look it up if you want.
I'm having a pop because she is a non entity sticking her EU nose into a UK debate about Europe, you know just like similar EU officials sticking their noses in and almost bringing parts of Europe to war!
You Europhiles should start putting some facts up about what the feck Europe does for us instead of just bleating when it gets knocked, fact is YOU have no case so all you can be is negative.

I know where her CV came from. I see as ever, you can't answer the question, so you completely avoid it, because the Daily Mail hasn't given you the answer. Try doing some thinking for yourself occasionally.

I'd be most surprised if "sticking her nose in", hadn't been down to being invited you to speak at Chatham House.

I'm glad Mr negative Pro Europe here has only been negative, and there's hardly been any negative posts from yourself in relation to the EU. Not a one. Ever. Honest. You've relied solely on your own well researched data, to present just the positive case for UK withdrawing. Oh errr....maybe apart from the odd 5 posts a day, quoting shite most of the time.

[Hoboh]

Oh you mean quotes that actually exist usually sourced from the organisation its self not made up wishy washy tripe about what the eu mythically does?
When are you ever going to answer the only question that matters
Just what does the EU do for the UK over and above what would be happening anyway and is it delivering value for money
Should be simple enough for you to answer seeing your quite apt dealing in questions

[CrazyHorse]

The part on her cv that states her sex

Whats that got to do with anything?

He was cracking a misogynistic joke about her being unsuitable for the job because she's a woman.

I thought it were a good gag myself but if you need it explaining it's ruined it.

[Hoboh]

Sorry hoss I was so far up my rectum I missed it

[Worthy4England]

Oh you mean quotes that actually exist usually sourced from the organisation its self not made up wishy washy tripe about what the eu mythically does?
When are you ever going to answer the only question that matters
Just what does the EU do for the UK over and above what would be happening anyway and is it delivering value for money
Should be simple enough for you to answer seeing your quite apt dealing in questions

1) Businesses who come to the UK get Europe-wide access and the ability to open branches etc in Europe, because we're in Europe.

2) Our businesses who trade with Europe, would still suffer "the rules" on what and what isn't allowed on production standards etc. But not get the benefit of not having to pay the import tariffs etc.

3) Outside the EU, we will have little influence over the direction of the EU. I don't believe that would be a good place to be, from an economic standpoint

4) I have a sneaking suspicion, that the additional taxes etc. We'd incur, would not be unadjacent to what we currently put. In fact, were I designing the system, I'd make it even less preferential, to encourage the inward investment to come into Europe rather than the UK

5) Folks talk about what it costs us, like we'd get it all back. Not true, we'd still have to fund the subsidies that certain industries get in the UK, as they'd no longer get it from the EU. Similar with the investment grants, regional development funds and suchlike.

There'a few to start with. Now what on the woman's CV makes her unsuitable for the job she does and why?

[Hoboh]

Oh you mean quotes that actually exist usually sourced from the organisation its self not made up wishy washy tripe about what the eu mythically does?
When are you ever going to answer the only question that matters
Just what does the EU do for the UK over and above what would be happening anyway and is it delivering value for money
Should be simple enough for you to answer seeing your quite apt dealing in questions

1) Businesses who come to the UK get Europe-wide access and the ability to open branches etc in Europe, because we're in Europe.

2) Our businesses who trade with Europe, would still suffer "the rules" on what and what isn't allowed on production standards etc. But not get the benefit of not having to pay the import tariffs etc.

3) Outside the EU, we will have little influence over the direction of the EU. I don't believe that would be a good place to be, from an economic standpoint

4) I have a sneaking suspicion, that the additional taxes etc. We'd incur, would not be unadjacent to what we currently put. In fact, were I designing the system, I'd make it even less preferential, to encourage the inward investment to come into Europe rather than the UK

5) Folks talk about what it costs us, like we'd get it all back. Not true, we'd still have to fund the subsidies that certain industries get in the UK, as they'd no longer get it from the EU. Similar with the investment grants, regional development funds and suchlike.

There'a few to start with. Now what on the woman's CV makes her unsuitable for the job she does and why?

So nothing concrete, thought not, just mere speculation that it would cost our business or business based here more to trade with the EU, I'm sure Mercedes, BMW, Audi and a host of French manufacturers would love to be hit by UK import tariffs as well.
Usual Pro EU bluster, no evidence.

Now the womans cv, I see nothing in it that makes her suitable for the post she holds.

[jaffka]

The part on her cv that states her sex

Whats that got to do with anything?

He was cracking a misogynistic joke about her being unsuitable for the job because she's a woman.

I thought it were a good gag myself but if you need it explaining it's ruined it.

[Worthy4England]

Oh you mean quotes that actually exist usually sourced from the organisation its self not made up wishy washy tripe about what the eu mythically does?
When are you ever going to answer the only question that matters
Just what does the EU do for the UK over and above what would be happening anyway and is it delivering value for money
Should be simple enough for you to answer seeing your quite apt dealing in questions

1) Businesses who come to the UK get Europe-wide access and the ability to open branches etc in Europe, because we're in Europe.

2) Our businesses who trade with Europe, would still suffer "the rules" on what and what isn't allowed on production standards etc. But not get the benefit of not having to pay the import tariffs etc.

3) Outside the EU, we will have little influence over the direction of the EU. I don't believe that would be a good place to be, from an economic standpoint

4) I have a sneaking suspicion, that the additional taxes etc. We'd incur, would not be unadjacent to what we currently put. In fact, were I designing the system, I'd make it even less preferential, to encourage the inward investment to come into Europe rather than the UK

5) Folks talk about what it costs us, like we'd get it all back. Not true, we'd still have to fund the subsidies that certain industries get in the UK, as they'd no longer get it from the EU. Similar with the investment grants, regional development funds and suchlike.

There'a few to start with. Now what on the woman's CV makes her unsuitable for the job she does and why?

So nothing concrete, thought not, just mere speculation that it would cost our business or business based here more to trade with the EU, I'm sure Mercedes, BMW, Audi and a host of French manufacturers would love to be hit by UK import tariffs as well.
Usual Pro EU bluster, no evidence.

Now the womans cv, I see nothing in it that makes her suitable for the post she holds.

So in the same post you accuse me of no facts, your facts regarding the CV were "I see nothing in it that makes her suitable for the post she holds" - feck me.

I'm delighted you mentioned the automobile market, where we get preferential trading terms with the entirety of Europe and in return they get preferential trading terms with one country - I wonder who that'll hurt more? The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders in the UK were highlighted in the FT, as having an overwhelming opposition to exit amongst it's members.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9bbcd386-7f89 ... z2vDnbEwGl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They also welcome the new trade deal that's currently being worked on by the EU with the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22909209" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please find some other big sticks to hit yourself with.

And before you find other random Daily Mail bollocks to spout, the CBI are also in favour of retaining membership. 71% of CBI member businesses favour retaining EU membership.

CBI estimates £62 - 78Bn per annum benefit to its members for retaining membership.

Those countries we're bailing out? Guess what, UK Businesses are exporting to them on very favourable terms. The 30 Free Trade Agreements owned by the EU on behalf of it's members is way more clout in terms of preferential rates than UK could muster.

63% of CBI businesses say that being able to recruit from the entire EU labour pool, fills skills gaps and has a positive impact on their business.

I see on the "You take the high road thread", that you point to Scotland departing on our terms (Scotland = smaller economy, UK = larger economy) - why would you think that would be different from the UK departing the EU?

[Relentless09]

Switzerland have been relatively successful without EU membership.

[Worthy4England]

Switzerland have been relatively successful without EU membership.

Most of their exports are in gold and pharmachem out of their top export destinations, only one is in Europe.

Most of Norway's in petrochem. Different base to us, in different proportions for both.

They're both subject to the trading legislation that anyone trading in Europe is subject to. Norway pays well over half the per capita contributions to the EU, as the UK, and doesn't get a vote on anything.

Switzerland also makes significant contributions and doesn't get a vote either.

[boltonboris]

I've said it before, that out of the EU, the general cost of goods will increase.

We'll have to offset it by exporting more in order to claim the same preference, but our manufacturing output is shit.

Like it or not, but in terms of trade, we piggy back on the output of Germany, Holland etc.

[Hoboh]

Oh you mean quotes that actually exist usually sourced from the organisation its self not made up wishy washy tripe about what the eu mythically does?
When are you ever going to answer the only question that matters
Just what does the EU do for the UK over and above what would be happening anyway and is it delivering value for money
Should be simple enough for you to answer seeing your quite apt dealing in questions

1) Businesses who come to the UK get Europe-wide access and the ability to open branches etc in Europe, because we're in Europe.

2) Our businesses who trade with Europe, would still suffer "the rules" on what and what isn't allowed on production standards etc. But not get the benefit of not having to pay the import tariffs etc.

3) Outside the EU, we will have little influence over the direction of the EU. I don't believe that would be a good place to be, from an economic standpoint

4) I have a sneaking suspicion, that the additional taxes etc. We'd incur, would not be unadjacent to what we currently put. In fact, were I designing the system, I'd make it even less preferential, to encourage the inward investment to come into Europe rather than the UK

5) Folks talk about what it costs us, like we'd get it all back. Not true, we'd still have to fund the subsidies that certain industries get in the UK, as they'd no longer get it from the EU. Similar with the investment grants, regional development funds and suchlike.

There'a few to start with. Now what on the woman's CV makes her unsuitable for the job she does and why?

So nothing concrete, thought not, just mere speculation that it would cost our business or business based here more to trade with the EU, I'm sure Mercedes, BMW, Audi and a host of French manufacturers would love to be hit by UK import tariffs as well.
Usual Pro EU bluster, no evidence.

Now the womans cv, I see nothing in it that makes her suitable for the post she holds.

So in the same post you accuse me of no facts, your facts regarding the CV were "I see nothing in it that makes her suitable for the post she holds" - feck me.

I'm delighted you mentioned the automobile market, where we get preferential trading terms with the entirety of Europe and in return they get preferential trading terms with one country - I wonder who that'll hurt more? The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders in the UK were highlighted in the FT, as having an overwhelming opposition to exit amongst it's members.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9bbcd386-7f89 ... z2vDnbEwGl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm delighted to have mentioned the automobile industry as well, one that is not in any way shape or form British
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders in the UK who are mainly sales/garage owners would be worried if the price of cars could possibly increase due to tariffs, hardly unbiased are they?
They also welcome the new trade deal that's currently being worked on by the EU with the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22909209" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh yes the link that hardly mentions any benefits to the UK more benefits to the US, I wonder if the greens of Europe will be happy with importing masses of shale 'devil' gas and the bit not mentioned in the link, GM Food crops!
Might be able to get a bigger US stick to hit myself with tho'
Please find some other big sticks to hit yourself with.

And before you find other random Daily Mail bollocks to spout, the CBI are also in favour of retaining membership. 71% of CBI member businesses favour retaining EU membership.
You quote the left wing pro EU BBC then have a dig about the Mail
CBI estimates £62 - 78Bn per annum benefit to its members for retaining membership.
CBI has been notoriously wrong about most things for years being they are the 'bosses' union they are biased one way every time, were they not the group predicting mass unemployment due to the minimum wage?

Those countries we're bailing out? Guess what, UK Businesses are exporting to them on very favourable terms. The 30 Free Trade Agreements owned by the EU on behalf of it's members is way more clout in terms of preferential rates than UK could muster.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... statistics
Portugal is currently the UK’s 15th largest export market in the EU and 42nd worldwide, with sales of goods of £1.3bn in 2012.
looking around I can find no offical figures for trade with Romania and Bulgaria which tends to suggest it ain't great and more of a one way drain.

The UK's trade deficit narrowed slightly to £3.2bn in November, from October's £3.5bn, due to higher exports of goods to the EU.
Britain's deficit in goods edged down to £9.4bn from £9.7bn, while the surplus in services held steady at £6.2bn.
Exports of goods increased by 2pc between October and November to £25.3bn, outpacing the 0.8pc rise in goods imports to £34.8bn. This was driven by an increase in trade with the EU.
Exports of goods to the rest of the bloc rose by £0.6bn in November, largely due to a £0.4bn jump in chemicals exports. Imports from the EU also increased, hitting a record high of £19.2bn, mainly attributed to cars.
However the longer-term trend remains one of falling exports and a widening trade deficit. In the three months from September to November, exports of goods fell 3pc, with those to EU countries decreasing by 5.2pc.
63% of CBI businesses say that being able to recruit from the entire EU labour pool, fills skills gaps and has a positive impact on their business.
Amazon, Google, Walmart, Tesco, large construction groups would wouldn't they, cheap labour always appeals to the CBI.I see on the "You take the high road thread", that you point to Scotland departing on our terms (Scotland = smaller economy, UK = larger economy) - why would you think that would be different from the UK departing the EU?
I'd be happy just to leave then renegoiate with individual countries, the Scots have the same option

[Worthy4England]

You really don't get this do you? I mean not at all.

There are a fairly hefty number of business groups that support staying in, because they believe it's of significant benefit to them, so "they're hardly unbiased are they?"

That takes the fcuking biscuit.

Of course they're hardly unbiased - because they believe it's of benefit to them. Which strangely enough is the whole fecking point. You're hardly unbiased either, because you think it's not of benefit to you.

The level of trade with the smaller and more EU nations is only small at the moment - that again is the whole point of cultivating them as emerging markets.

How long will it take you to renegotiate the bilateral or multilateral trade agreements? Why would anyone give an economy the size of the UK a preferential rate over an economy the size of Europe?

[Hoboh]

http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/pres ... embership/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Right I would suggest you read the above, carefully.

Even the bosses mafia are not happy with the EU and its misson creep, the lack of British posts appointed to EU institutions and although they wish to remain in the EU it must be with reform.
This idea of reform of the EU gets shot down on a weekly basis, Merkel did it last week, clearly it ain't going to happen.
I don't think many of the Anti EU or Ukippers, myself included, would argue with a common trading market, which we signed up to, but that is not what we have got!
So its mega reform or out, the biggest worry is the very undemocratic pro-europe group that refuse to hold a referendum about the over and above the original deal subsquent governments have signed us upto.

BTW I don't believe its not just good for me what we have I believe it it not good for the majority of the country not now and certainly not in a future were we are dictated to more and more until we lose all our democracy!

[Worthy4England]

At no point, ever, have I suggested what we have is perfect. But that's a whole world away from thinking we should be sat outside.

The CBI does not propose "out" as any sort of credible alternative, like the black and white Yes/No vote, self interested career politicians are suggesting. I trust them not one whit to propose this for any other reason than short term, self interest.

I still haven't seen anyone from the "out" lobby explain how long it would take to put in place a full set of revised trade agreements, or what benefit, financially they think this would have. Because quite simply, they can't. They've not articulated how much we'd still pay to Europe, nor how our Contributions to other non-European organisations would increase as a result of us not paying in via Europe. Nor how much influence they think we'd have against a much larger Club, whose goal is to work together and collaboratively.

[Hoboh]

Shock election result!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Really why do they bother?

[Prufrock]

I know. It'd be funny if it wasn't so awful. Either don't bother, or at least make it sound plausible!

My fav one was last year in Azerbaijan where they tried to make it sound like an at least plausible landslide, but accidentally released it the day before polling !