Is it the fault of the Unions?

rolf_f
rolf_f Posts: 16,015
edited June 2016 in The cake stop
So, if the Unions hadn't got Ed in as leader of the labour party instead of David, would we be in this appalling mess now? The consequences of this are varied but even if we'd still have had Cameron as PM, would he have promised the referendum and would the vote have been lost with a less ineffective Labour leader?
Faster than a tent.......

Comments

  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,486
    If my auntie had balls she would be my uncle.
    Not worth spending time mulling over.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    If your Auntie had balls she would still be your Auntie.
    There in lies the problem...
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,486
    RideOnTime wrote:
    If your Auntie had balls she would still be your Auntie.
    There in lies the problem...
    You spent too much time thinking about that.
    And I spent too much time reading and responding....
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Rolf F wrote:
    So, if the Unions hadn't got Ed in as leader of the labour party instead of David, would we be in this appalling mess now? The consequences of this are varied but even if we'd still have had Cameron as PM, would he have promised the referendum and would the vote have been lost with a less ineffective Labour leader?

    100% on Cameron
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Not worth spending time mulling over.

    Nothing h is really worth spending time mulling over. For me it is an interesting and depressing thought. It's felt like a slow motion car crash right from the beginning but I never imagined it would end up as a full scale motorway pile up and perhaps it hasn't stopped yet. No doubt Brexit will give encouragement to Donald Trumps fans that yes, no matter how demented your views are, in the modern political world they can prevail.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,486
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • Flâneur
    Flâneur Posts: 3,081
    what if...

    What if, labour had moved faster on declaring for a remain/ remaining engaged with their locations
    What if, DC hadn't had to bridge a divide in his party
    What if, New Labour hadn't lost touch with their safe spots
    What if, the Lib Dems hadn't messed up their time, would DC have had control/party isues
    What if, New Labour had solved the economy - would DC be in
    What if, Lehman Bro hadn't crashed
    What if, we had never gone to war (under blair)
    what if, is endless and crosses how many moments in history?


    History is one thing fking thing after another, (stolen quote) I can see why you would put what if's out there it is something I do, problem is then you kick yourself and think christ wouldn't life be better IF.

    ponder it but dont think, then look for the bright side, no matter which way you voted. Most people will want the same thing, a better quality of life
    Stevo 666 wrote: Come on you Scousers! 20/12/2014
    Crudder
    CX
    Toy
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    No. The Remain side failed to make a positive case for the EU. They should have been speaking about what the EU could do for the people of this country, not what a disaster it would be outside.
  • CiB
    CiB Posts: 6,098
    Flâneur wrote:
    what if...

    What if, labour had moved faster on declaring for a remain/ remaining engaged with their locations
    What if, DC hadn't had to bridge a divide in his party
    What if, New Labour hadn't lost touch with their safe spots
    What if, the Lib Dems hadn't messed up their time, would DC have had control/party isues
    What if, New Labour had solved the economy - would DC be in
    What if, Lehman Bro hadn't crashed
    What if, we had never gone to war (under blair)
    what if, is endless and crosses how many moments in history?


    History is one thing fking thing after another, (stolen quote) I can see why you would put what if's out there it is something I do, problem is then you kick yourself and think christ wouldn't life be better IF.

    ponder it but dont think, then look for the bright side, no matter which way you voted. Most people will want the same thing, a better quality of life
    Ha ha. You were doing all right till you came up with that. :)
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,808
    finchy wrote:
    No. The Remain side failed to make a positive case for the EU. They should have been speaking about what the EU could do for the people of this country, not what a disaster it would be outside.
    Given we have been in for 40 years, more a case of explaining what it was already doing as if they hadn't already done it, they should have by now. But that doesn't sound as compelling.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Flâneur
    Flâneur Posts: 3,081
    CiB wrote:
    Ha ha. You were doing all right till you came up with that. :)

    I typed several things, didn't know which was true so left it :) Ignorance is a terrible thing if you realise you are ignorant
    Stevo 666 wrote: Come on you Scousers! 20/12/2014
    Crudder
    CX
    Toy
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Flâneur wrote:
    CiB wrote:
    Ha ha. You were doing all right till you came up with that. :)

    I typed several things, didn't know which was true so left it :) Ignorance is a terrible thing if you realise you are ignorant

    100% on Cameron for asking a question that the majority of the electorate were not qualified to answer
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,486
    Rolf F wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    "It's important to just accept the result and move on, possibly to another country."
    ™ Frankie Boyle.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    No. The Remain side failed to make a positive case for the EU. They should have been speaking about what the EU could do for the people of this country, not what a disaster it would be outside.
    Given we have been in for 40 years, more a case of explaining what it was already doing as if they hadn't already done it, they should have by now. But that doesn't sound as compelling.

    OK, fair point. Let me rephrase. Remain should have explained what the EU is, what it does and given some specific examples of how it has benefited ordinary people in the past and present, and how it will do so in the future.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,808
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Flâneur wrote:
    CiB wrote:
    Ha ha. You were doing all right till you came up with that. :)

    I typed several things, didn't know which was true so left it :) Ignorance is a terrible thing if you realise you are ignorant

    100% on Cameron for asking a question that the majority of the electorate were not qualified to answer
    QK, just say that the UK had never joined the EU and that we were now having a referendum on joining the EU. Would you still be saying that the referendum should never be held because the majority of the electorate are not qualified to answer the question?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    finchy wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    No. The Remain side failed to make a positive case for the EU. They should have been speaking about what the EU could do for the people of this country, not what a disaster it would be outside.
    Given we have been in for 40 years, more a case of explaining what it was already doing as if they hadn't already done it, they should have by now. But that doesn't sound as compelling.

    OK, fair point. Let me rephrase. Remain should have explained what the EU is, what it does and given some specific examples of how it has benefited ordinary people in the past and present, and how it will do so in the future.


    I think they did, it's just that the media wanted to report the circus, and the players (both sides) responded by giving them ever more circus routines.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Flâneur wrote:
    CiB wrote:
    Ha ha. You were doing all right till you came up with that. :)

    I typed several things, didn't know which was true so left it :) Ignorance is a terrible thing if you realise you are ignorant

    100% on Cameron for asking a question that the majority of the electorate were not qualified to answer
    QK, just say that the UK had never joined the EU and that we were now having a referendum on joining the EU. Would you still be saying that the referendum should never be held because the majority of the electorate are not qualified to answer the question?

    Yes definitely. Leaders should lead.
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    mrfpb wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    No. The Remain side failed to make a positive case for the EU. They should have been speaking about what the EU could do for the people of this country, not what a disaster it would be outside.
    Given we have been in for 40 years, more a case of explaining what it was already doing as if they hadn't already done it, they should have by now. But that doesn't sound as compelling.

    OK, fair point. Let me rephrase. Remain should have explained what the EU is, what it does and given some specific examples of how it has benefited ordinary people in the past and present, and how it will do so in the future.


    I think they did, it's just that the media wanted to report the circus, and the players (both sides) responded by giving them ever more circus routines.

    There's a bit of that, but the remain camp could definitely have put the pro-EU case more strongly.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,808
    Rolf F wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    It move backwards if we all sit around saying 'we're doomed' rather than making the most of the situation we're in.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rolf F wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    It move backwards if we all sit around saying 'we're doomed' rather than making the most of the situation we're in.

    The problem is that we don't know what we're moving on to. If you're a business looking for investment, for the next couple of years the answer to many of your questions will be "don't know".
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,808
    finchy wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rolf F wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    It move backwards if we all sit around saying 'we're doomed' rather than making the most of the situation we're in.

    The problem is that we don't know what we're moving on to. If you're a business looking for investment, for the next couple of years the answer to many of your questions will be "don't know".
    Not necessarily. Will vary by business sector and individual business but it's certainly not stopping us getting on with what we need to do - including investment. I'm coordinating our BREXIT contingency planning task force at work so have spent a fair bit of time on this. There are certain things we know will not be materially affected.

    Bit of positive thinking and some sensible risk taking is nothing new in business. Added to that we are also looking at what opportunities might arise from this.

    Fyi can't see how your own business would be materially affected even if there is no trade deal. IMO.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rolf F wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Yes.
    But look forward. Move on.

    Hard to look forward when the country is moving backward at such a pace.
    It move backwards if we all sit around saying 'we're doomed' rather than making the most of the situation we're in.

    The problem is that we don't know what we're moving on to. If you're a business looking for investment, for the next couple of years the answer to many of your questions will be "don't know".
    Not necessarily. Will vary by business sector and individual business but it's certainly not stopping us getting on with what we need to do - including investment. I'm coordinating our BREXIT contingency planning task force at work so have spent a fair bit of time on this. There are certain things we know will not be materially affected.

    Bit of positive thinking and some sensible risk taking is nothing new in business. Added to that we are also looking at what opportunities might arise from this.

    Fyi can't see how your own business would be materially affected even if there is no trade deal. IMO.

    Mine won't be. I was thinking more about businesses which export goods or services. They're just going to have to wait and see which trade deals emerge before deciding whether or not to invest.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,808
    finchy wrote:
    Mine won't be. I was thinking more about businesses which export goods or services. They're just going to have to wait and see which trade deals emerge before deciding whether or not to invest.
    Mine does - and like I said, we are cracking on. The sort of services we provide are unlikely to be affected and the WTO regs cover 90%+ of our goods. We've done enough planning to be comfortable.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • florerider
    florerider Posts: 1,112
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Not necessarily. Will vary by business sector and individual business but it's certainly not stopping us getting on with what we need to do - including investment.

    Fyi can't see how your own business would be materially affected even if there is no trade deal. IMO.

    It might not be stopping you, and I am pleased it does not, but our experience is that investors can find plenty of good opportunities with lower political risk elsewhere in Europe. We find people wanting to invest in other European countries but avoiding the UK. We have assets here and elsewhere so we do see the difference. As I said previously, it is the loss of perception of being a stable and known entity that spooks them. In terms of inward investment we found it very very quiet up to Thursday, the silence only broken by the whoosh of money flowing out of the country on Friday.

    I think whether a business is affected in the event of no trade deal is a tricky question, for example if it is under WTO, who pays the tariffs? Any contract predicated upon no tariffs being due because the purchaser is an EU entity will still apply, leaving the UK vendor to pay the difference, and one where the EU buyer pays would probably cause him to FM the contract.

    I also suspect there will be a difference in what people think of as investment. I would not anticipate professional business services companies stopping investment in what they need to run their business, but businesses needing large capital investments into plant and facilities, such as manufacturing, construction and utilities, may see it differently.
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,444
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    finchy wrote:
    Mine won't be. I was thinking more about businesses which export goods or services. They're just going to have to wait and see which trade deals emerge before deciding whether or not to invest.
    Mine does - and like I said, we are cracking on. The sort of services we provide are unlikely to be affected and the WTO regs cover 90%+ of our goods. We've done enough planning to be comfortable.
    We've done no real planning as my boss (who voted leave) is burying his head in the sand and if you make any reference to negative impacts of Brexit he just ignores you. E.g., I mentioned yesterday I wished I bought my holiday euros last week and he just pretends you've not said anything.

    Given the EU directives we're helping clients comply with may not even apply after 2018 I think he's underestimating it...
  • eric_draven
    eric_draven Posts: 1,192
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    I mentioned yesterday I wished I bought my holiday euros last week

    That makes two of us,a little thing called hindsight :roll:

Categories