I am not surprised by this. The sad fact is, a lot of people in GB, particularly those of a more isolationist tendency, don't care much about Ireland. This sentiment has long existed among a sizeable proportion of the population imo, even during the peak of the Troubles.
It would be hard to argue that through history the net benefit of our involvement with Ireland outweighs the considerable costs and grief that had ensued, and in present day economic terms the net benefit is unclear. So they are being entirely rational if that is their view.
Our record in Ireland is appalling.
Had it not been so, I’d expect Ireland to still be part of the UK today.
Not sure what you mean. Apart from the odd invasion, pillage, imposition of a ruling class, famine and rather brutal civil war where did we go wrong?
Not telling the lord's to go and f off over the Irish Home Rule Bill back in Gladstone's day.
I am not surprised by this. The sad fact is, a lot of people in GB, particularly those of a more isolationist tendency, don't care much about Ireland. This sentiment has long existed among a sizeable proportion of the population imo, even during the peak of the Troubles.
It would be hard to argue that through history the net benefit of our involvement with Ireland outweighs the considerable costs and grief that had ensued, and in present day economic terms the net benefit is unclear. So they are being entirely rational if that is their view.
Our record in Ireland is appalling.
Had it not been so, I’d expect Ireland to still be part of the UK today.
Not sure what you mean. Apart from the odd invasion, pillage, imposition of a ruling class, famine and rather brutal civil war where did we go wrong?
So what’s the point of leaving with the deal again?
We avoid Crashout Brexit and get controls over Freedom of Movement, at the cost of surrendering control over financial issues.
Seriously, although I am amused at the idea of the EU imposing a Tobin Tax on us post Brexit, it would be a very bad idea to introduce regulatory equivalence between the UK and the EU on terms dictated by the EU. The EU have unfortunately amply demonstrated over the last eleven years that they have no clue what they're doing in fincancial matters and no intention of learning from their very many mistakes. Leaving the City open to their bungling would leave us wide open to contagion the next time there's a banking crisis in the EU - which would almost certainly follow swiftly from Brexit.
If we’re going to have the Chequers Deal, i’d rather have full regulatory freedom and independence for our financial services sector rather than cling ourselves to the regulatory bosom of the EU forevermore to maintain a nominal equivalence.
Wrt to a financial transactions tax, it isn't easy to see how they would force the government to collect a tax it doesn't want to. Tax is outside the scope of the EBA and ESMA, it would have to be imposed separately by all 27 EU nations which means it would be outside of the scope of regulatory equivalence, given that taxes aren't regulations.
A financial transactions tax is a great idea if done in moderation, and I look forward to it coming about in the rest of the EU once the dead blocking hand of the UK government is removed. At which point the merits will become obvious and the UK will then belatedly join in.
It's a bit like all those measures within the UK which were once resisted by Westminster civil servants, only to see them proved wrong when implemented elsewhere once the Scots and Welsh got the power to try them out, after which the English belatedly joined in.
Hold up.
You Leavers keep on saying the UK never had any influence in the EU and that we couldn’t stop stuff we didn’t like.
Minorities better watch out... they are usually targets.
I think you misunderstand nationalism which, at its best, does not have to descend into bitter foreigner-hating xenophobia. Though we have far too much of the latter at present.
Also, minorities, such as Jews, are already being targeted. See the extraordinary statement by one poster here about their “long term future” and other public figures saying that it is their fault that they are being picked on by Labour. I feel that Labour has already crossed a line of decency into behaviour and attitudes which are reminiscent of 1930’s Fascist or Nazi parties. Even worse, if possible, is that so many people are trying their hardest to ignore this or justify it. I am afraid that I do not admire such people, however calm they are. They are, in the words of MPs commenting on the aid scandal, guilty of “complacency verging on complicity”.
Still, at least you and I can discuss shoes!
Looking at some of the statements made by public figures in the UK today, I can see how Germany made the transition to fascism in the 1930s and I could easily believe that the UK might have its own version of Kristallnacht in the next decade.
This is the country I grew up in and raised children in and worked in and contributed to and it feels like it is slipping away.
The problem is that Nationalism too often becomes a way of expressing hate, or at least distaste, of "others", "them" rather than "us" and then you are only a few steps away from ethnic cleansing and the rest.
Looking at some of the statements made by public figures in the UK today, I can see how Germany made the transition to fascism in the 1930s and I could easily believe that the UK might have its own version of Kristallnacht in the next decade.
This is the country I grew up in and raised children in and worked in and contributed to and it feels like it is slipping away.
It's upsetting to hear anyone say that. I have no counter-argument...
There is a counter argument , that it is bull shit.Most peoplle in this country have no such inclination to any sort of racism.They are the majority.Not some nutjobs on twitter and the occasional one on here.
“For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good men to do nothing.”
A financial transactions tax is a great idea if done in moderation, and I look forward to it coming about in the rest of the EU once the dead blocking hand of the UK government is removed. At which point the merits will become obvious and the UK will then belatedly join in.
It's a bit like all those measures within the UK which were once resisted by Westminster civil servants, only to see them proved wrong when implemented elsewhere once the Scots and Welsh got the power to try them out, after which the English belatedly joined in.
Hold up.
You Leavers keep on saying the UK never had any influence in the EU and that we couldn’t stop stuff we didn’t like.
So which is it?
Did I? But since you are asking me:
1. It is far easier to stop something happening in the EU than to make anything happen. Changing the wrong course the EU oil tanker is set upon is very difficult because it has grown so large, which is why it is a failing institution whose national economies are falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
2. In this case, the UK has more influence than normal because of the size of its financial sector. Generally, we have nothing like the per capita influence of Germany and France, and the influence of national governments is also diminished by the power of the Commission.
Scotland will be an independent country and Northern Ireland will soon(ish) be part of the Republic of Ireland.
The question is, will Brexit accelerate the timetables? Almost certainly, yes.
So faced with the choice of a hard Brexit border or no border, the circumstances that would hold out the genuine prospect of the former are more likely to make the Scots vote for secession?
1. It is far easier to stop something happening in the EU than to make anything happen. Changing the wrong course the EU oil tanker is set upon is very difficult because it has grown so large, which is why it is a failing institution whose national economies are falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
So what’s the point of leaving with the deal again?
We avoid Crashout Brexit and get controls over Freedom of Movement, at the cost of surrendering control over financial issues.
Seriously, although I am amused at the idea of the EU imposing a Tobin Tax on us post Brexit, it would be a very bad idea to introduce regulatory equivalence between the UK and the EU on terms dictated by the EU. The EU have unfortunately amply demonstrated over the last eleven years that they have no clue what they're doing in fincancial matters and no intention of learning from their very many mistakes. Leaving the City open to their bungling would leave us wide open to contagion the next time there's a banking crisis in the EU - which would almost certainly follow swiftly from Brexit.
If we’re going to have the Chequers Deal, i’d rather have full regulatory freedom and independence for our financial services sector rather than cling ourselves to the regulatory bosom of the EU forevermore to maintain a nominal equivalence.
You are not quite understanding what you are writing about. In that case freedom and independence for our financial services sector means the freedom not to be able to trade with Europe.
So what’s the point of leaving with the deal again?
We avoid Crashout Brexit and get controls over Freedom of Movement, at the cost of surrendering control over financial issues.
Seriously, although I am amused at the idea of the EU imposing a Tobin Tax on us post Brexit, it would be a very bad idea to introduce regulatory equivalence between the UK and the EU on terms dictated by the EU. The EU have unfortunately amply demonstrated over the last eleven years that they have no clue what they're doing in fincancial matters and no intention of learning from their very many mistakes. Leaving the City open to their bungling would leave us wide open to contagion the next time there's a banking crisis in the EU - which would almost certainly follow swiftly from Brexit.
If we’re going to have the Chequers Deal, i’d rather have full regulatory freedom and independence for our financial services sector rather than cling ourselves to the regulatory bosom of the EU forevermore to maintain a nominal equivalence.
Wrt to a financial transactions tax, it isn't easy to see how they would force the government to collect a tax it doesn't want to. Tax is outside the scope of the EBA and ESMA, it would have to be imposed separately by all 27 EU nations which means it would be outside of the scope of regulatory equivalence, given that taxes aren't regulations.
It depends what you mean. Once the UK has left then I can’t immediately see how regulatory equivalence would lead to having to participate in levying an FTT so you’d assume that the EU FTT would be applicable to instruments issued in the EU27 and not the UK. But you’d expect it to be collected regardless of where the trading took place (as with the French and Italian FTTs and of course UK SDRT in many cases) - though one of the stumbling blocks with agreeing the FTT in the first place was how to approach the collection and reporting given the differences across various EU markets.
A few years old but this is a good read on the subject.
The clue when trying to decipher any particular EU financial services regulation is to start with the client. If the client is in the EU then any firm dealing with that client is caught by ECB regs.
Comments
You Leavers keep on saying the UK never had any influence in the EU and that we couldn’t stop stuff we didn’t like.
So which is it?
The question is, will Brexit accelerate the timetables? Almost certainly, yes.
Breakup of the Union was always a very likely outcome of Brexit, the only question is how much faster it happens as a result.
https://twitter.com/DavidYoungPA/status/1023999494428479489
1. It is far easier to stop something happening in the EU than to make anything happen. Changing the wrong course the EU oil tanker is set upon is very difficult because it has grown so large, which is why it is a failing institution whose national economies are falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
2. In this case, the UK has more influence than normal because of the size of its financial sector. Generally, we have nothing like the per capita influence of Germany and France, and the influence of national governments is also diminished by the power of the Commission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_growth_1980–2010