Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Eloise posted:

GTB-Buckaroo posted:

As one who can remember the 3 day week, piles of rotting rubbish, delayed funerals, militant car workers, Red Robbo, power cuts, strikes every other day, it was little wonder that the country voted in Thatcher.

I don't think anyone would argue that 3 day week and continual strikes is a good thing: the problem with dismissing them in such a way is that you never get to the heart of if they were a cause of discontentment in the country and therefore a good argument for keeping away from left wing (as opposed to either left of centre or extreme left wing) views, or simply an effect and symptom of underlying discontentment.

Nope, Eloise! I have read your comment several times and it still does not compute. I lived and flourished through the 70s as did many others. However, the escapades of the militant unions, Labour  once again dashing to the extreme left with Benn etc,  the out of control Councils as well as good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

I have never voted Labour in my life and never will now. My wife had a dalliance with Labour in 1997 and lived to regret that very much.  Did vote SNP during the 70s when they were headed up by Gordon Wilson, a sensible Solicitor and my local MP, well before lunatics like Sturgeon and Salmond took control. Always been very slightly to the right. ????

Eloise posted:

Our politicians have always (possibly with the exception of Blair) approached "Europe" with the attitude of how can we get of "Europe" the most benefit for the UK.  To the whole idea of European unity that is an anathema.  It should have been about how can we change "Europe" for the betterment of the whole of Europe.

 

I'm not sure that I can think of any country that has not seen its main aim as getting as much out of Europe for as little input as possible.

Resurrection posted:

good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

The self serving British management is the result of right wing not left wing.  Its still in force today!

Thatcher was certainly a butcher ... the problem was that while she was cleaning away the "rotten" she cared not a jot for those left behind.  I would not argue that the coal industry for one was on its last legs before she came along ... but instead of providing a replacement for it ... she cut away the heart of the country without offering those who lost out an alternative.  

While coal mining (and other industry) was a hard, unforgiving job; those who did it had pride and that pride leg to a sense of community.  Thatcher came along and (to use blunt rhetoric) effectively told them they were thick scum who had no place in modern Britain.

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

The self serving British management is the result of right wing not left wing.  Its still in force today!

Thatcher was certainly a butcher ... the problem was that while she was cleaning away the "rotten" she cared not a jot for those left behind.  I would not argue that the coal industry for one was on its last legs before she came along ... but instead of providing a replacement for it ... she cut away the heart of the country without offering those who lost out an alternative.  

While coal mining (and other industry) was a hard, unforgiving job; those who did it had pride and that pride leg to a sense of community.  Thatcher came along and (to use blunt rhetoric) effectively told them they were thick scum who had no place in modern Britain.

The closure of coal mines was carried out by Labour pre Thatcher and Labour also closed more mines than Thatcher. My point about British management was to highlight that problems were endemic from top to bottom in British society, then as now. 

As to your own response elsewhere as thinking it was ‘poor form’ to expect  more from the Eu than  you put in, that is truly hilarious. We, the Brits, have put in hundreds of billions more than we have got out. If many of the net receivers were asked to make a positive contribution the clamour for Referendums would be deafening. 

And finally thatcher the destroyer was scraped away as the most rotten of rotten meat. Unfortunately her me-me-me culture continues to pervade society.  Would that all her supporters might have considered a form of political suttee.

Resurrection posted:

As to your own response elsewhere as thinking it was ‘poor form’ to expect  more from the Eu than  you put in, that is truly hilarious. We, the Brits, have put in hundreds of billions more than we have got out. If many of the net receivers were asked to make a positive contribution the clamour for Referendums would be deafening. 

As always you are thinking only of money... and money in absolute terms rather than the "value" that being part of "Europe" has added to the UK which far exceeds probably even the Gross contributions the UK made to "Europe".

Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK would have been a world leader in scientific research without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK's influence on the world would have been as significant without being part of "Europe"?

Do you really think the UK would have been as prosperous without being part of "Europe"?

Actually I suspect that your answer to all those questions will be Yes... but my opinion is that the UK is prosperous and strong BECAUSE its part of the EU not despite it.  Thats not "talking the country down" as many politicians would have you believe ... its facing the reality that in an increasingly global world (and leaving the EU is not going to change that) be are (were) stronger as part of the EU than we can ever be on our own.

Trump and others applaud Brexit, not because they think the UK will be stronger on its own, but because they see that isolated from the protection of "Europe" the UK will be easier to manipulate.  The idea of the UK being the 51st state seems closer than ever!

But anyway you miss the point ... Cameron's so called negotiation was a perfect example - his demands of the EU were that - blackmail demands.  "Do this, this and this for the UK; otherwise I will support the UK leaving the EU".  There was nothing about how the EU could be improved for the need of the UK AND for the EU as a whole.

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

As to your own response elsewhere as thinking it was ‘poor form’ to expect  more from the Eu than  you put in, that is truly hilarious. We, the Brits, have put in hundreds of billions more than we have got out. If many of the net receivers were asked to make a positive contribution the clamour for Referendums would be deafening. 

As always you are thinking only of money... and money in absolute terms rather than the "value" that being part of "Europe" has added to the UK which far exceeds probably even the Gross contributions the UK made to "Europe".

Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK would have been a world leader in scientific research without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK's influence on the world would have been as significant without being part of "Europe"?

Do you really think the UK would have been as prosperous without being part of "Europe"?

Actually I suspect that your answer to all those questions will be Yes... but my opinion is that the UK is prosperous and strong BECAUSE its part of the EU not despite it.  Thats not "talking the country down" as many politicians would have you believe ... its facing the reality that in an increasingly global world (and leaving the EU is not going to change that) be are (were) stronger as part of the EU than we can ever be on our own.

Trump and others applaud Brexit, not because they think the UK will be stronger on its own, but because they see that isolated from the protection of "Europe" the UK will be easier to manipulate.  The idea of the UK being the 51st state seems closer than ever!

But anyway you miss the point ... Cameron's so called negotiation was a perfect example - his demands of the EU were that - blackmail demands.  "Do this, this and this for the UK; otherwise I will support the UK leaving the EU".  There was nothing about how the EU could be improved for the need of the UK AND for the EU as a whole.

I did not wish to get involved in this debate but either you are unaware of the facts or are not telling the truth. Cameron went into the negotiations declaring that he supported remaining whatever the outcomes. His ‘demands’ were weak and pointless anyway.

I look forward to your retraction and apology.

In response to another message, I hold that idiot Cameron entirely responsible for getting us into this mess.

PeterJ posted:

I did not wish to get involved in this debate but either you are unaware of the facts or are not telling the truth. Cameron went into the negotiations declaring that he supported remaining whatever the outcomes. His ‘demands’ were weak and pointless anyway.

I look forward to your retraction and apology.

Only he didn't declare "that he supported remaining whatever the outcomes"... in a speech on 10th November 2015 (at the start of formal negotiations with the EU) he said...

and if Britain’s concerns were to be met with a deaf ear, which I do not believe will happen…

…then we will have to think again about whether this European Union is right for us.

As I have said before – I rule nothing out.

So no, no retraction or apology is needed (IMO).

Eloise posted:

Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK would have been a world leader in scientific research without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK's influence on the world would have been as significant without being part of "Europe"?

Do you really think the UK would have been as prosperous without being part of "Europe"?

Actually I suspect that your answer to all those questions will be Yes...

Eloise, we are in agreement. My answer is a qualified "Yes". If it was still the EEC I would not be discussing any of this and I suspect there would have been no Referendum. However, it morphed into the grand Kleptocracy run by a bunch of Federasts such as Juncker, Schulz,etc. etc. And am afraid the money, money, money they have thieved from this country to build their empire does matter to me.

Resurrection posted:

Eloise, we are in agreement. My answer is a qualified "Yes". 

If you answer “Yes” to those question ... then we are in complete *disagreement*!

As for the money... well as has been pointed out countless times any net financial payment to the EU has been more than made up for in financial gains for the U.K. economy. 

But this is the same argument again and again...

Resurrection posted:

Eloise posted:

Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK would have been a world leader in scientific research without being part of "Europe"?

Do you think the UK's influence on the world would have been as significant without being part of "Europe"?

Do you really think the UK would have been as prosperous without being part of "Europe"?

Actually I suspect that your answer to all those questions will be Yes...

Eloise, we are in agreement. My answer is a qualified "Yes". If it was still the EEC I would not be discussing any of this and I suspect there would have been no Referendum. However, it morphed into the grand Kleptocracy run by a bunch of Federasts such as Juncker, Schulz,etc. etc. And am afraid the money, money, money they have thieved from this country to build their empire does matter to me.

Sadly the answer to...

Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?
and
Do you think the UK's influence on the world would have been as significant without being part of "Europe"?
and
Do you really think the UK would have been as prosperous without being part of "Europe"?

...is quite clearly NO.
To think otherwise is to exhibit an isolationist "Little Britain" mentality.

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

The self serving British management is the result of right wing not left wing.  Its still in force today!

<snip>

In my observation the Management problem in Britain is that Management is seen as a job per se, rather than a means to make a business run more efficiently.

The only way for a manager to justify their salary, is to make those whom they manage work that much more efficiently so that they then earn more revenue for the company than it costs to employ the manager!  (This is a very unpopular opinion when expressed to most 'professional' managers!)

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Eloise, we are in agreement. My answer is a qualified "Yes". 

If you answer “Yes” to those question ... then we are in complete *disagreement*!

As for the money... well as has been pointed out countless times any net financial payment to the EU has been more than made up for in financial gains for the U.K. economy. 

But this is the same argument again and again...

Yep again and as always you are in the wrong and I am perfectly correct!

Huge posted:

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

The self serving British management is the result of right wing not left wing.  Its still in force today!

<snip>

In my observation the Management problem in Britain is that Management is seen as a job per se, rather than a means to make a business run more efficiently.

The only way for a manager to justify their salary, is to make those whom they manage work that much more efficiently so that they then earn more revenue for the company than it costs to employ the manager!  (This is a very unpopular opinion when expressed to most 'professional' managers!)

Actually, hopefully to be fair to you, I believe it has been far too easy for foreign companies to asset strip here eg Cadburys  or  ARM and also too easy to come and go unpenalised eg Cadburys again. Too easy to steal a business or simply remove it.

Resurrection posted:

Yep again and as always you are in the wrong and I am perfectly correct!

Thank you for expanding my vocabulary and introducing me to new meanings of the words "wrong" and "correct" that not only was I hitherto unfamiliar with but are in fact completely the opposite to the meanings I was aware of...

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Yep again and as always you are in the wrong and I am perfectly correct!

Thank you for expanding my vocabulary and introducing me to new meanings of the words "wrong" and "correct" that not only was I hitherto unfamiliar with but are in fact completely the opposite to the meanings I was aware of...

I am delighted to be able to expand your vocabulary to include "wrong" as far as you are concerned. I am only here to educate you politically and literally. 

Eloise posted:

<snip>
...in fact completely the opposite to the meanings I was aware of...

Tut tut.

Don't you know that a preposition isn't an appropriate word to end a sentence with?

Resurrection posted:

Huge posted:

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

good old self serving British management simply accelerated our decline as a nation. Thatcher was needed by the country, did steady the ship and scraped away some of the rotten meat much to the horror of her (many) detractors. 

The self serving British management is the result of right wing not left wing.  Its still in force today!

<snip>

In my observation the Management problem in Britain is that Management is seen as a job per se, rather than a means to make a business run more efficiently.

The only way for a manager to justify their salary, is to make those whom they manage work that much more efficiently so that they then earn more revenue for the company than it costs to employ the manager!  (This is a very unpopular opinion when expressed to most 'professional' managers!)

Actually, hopefully to be fair to you, I believe it has been far too easy for foreign companies to asset strip here eg Cadburys  or  ARM and also too easy to come and go unpenalised eg Cadburys again. Too easy to steal a business or simply remove it.

That seems to be a non sequitur.  The take-over of PLCs is something that's planned and arranged at board level, not a management issue.

But in itself I agree, and also agree that there has been a degree of political failing in this, particularly in the case of Cadbury's.

"Do you think Nissan and Honda would have come to UK without being part of "Europe"?"

One thing is for sure in that the Japanese car industry nigh destroyed our car industry simply because it offered better made cars with lots of extras, i.e titnted glass, electric windows, etc as standard on their basic offerings. They didn't leave oil slicks on the drive, nor did they continually break down. Compare an Austin Allegro to a Datsun Cherry and you will see what I mean.

However, and returning to the question, Nissan and Honda and perhaps other 'foreign manufacturers' were given strict import quotas for their product into the UK. However, if their products were shipped here and assembled here in UK plants, the quota rule was relaxed. And this happened,iirc, during the 80s

Sorry, that of course should have read TINTED glass, not TITNTED

And their cars were of course brought in as kits, not complete vehicles or there wouldn't have been any point...

Huge posted:

In my observation the Management problem in Britain is that Management is seen as a job per se, rather than a means to make a business run more efficiently.

The only way for a manager to justify their salary, is to make those whom they manage work that much more efficiently so that they then earn more revenue for the company than it costs to employ the manager!  (This is a very unpopular opinion when expressed to most 'professional' managers!)

Actually, hopefully to be fair to you, I believe it has been far too easy for foreign companies to asset strip here eg Cadburys  or  ARM and also too easy to come and go unpenalised eg Cadburys again. Too easy to steal a business or simply remove it.

That seems to be a non sequitur.  The take-over of PLCs is something that's planned and arranged at board level, not a management issue.

But in itself I agree, and also agree that there has been a degree of political failing in this, particularly in the case of Cadbury's.

You are right it was a non sequitur and i should have probably said business rather than management. Management in the UK, to me, seems to have been historically a demarcation line in the business - them and us, which exists, to  a certain extent up to today.

The sense of distrust between the management layer and the shop floor rather than seamless coordination and cooperation for the benefit of the business is still not properly functioning in British society. When companies like Honda or Nissan or Toyota impose their model it has been proven that the British worker can be as effective as anyone anywhere. 

Huge posted:

Eloise posted:

<snip>
...in fact completely the opposite to the meanings I was aware of...

Tut tut.

Don't you know that a preposition isn't an appropriate word to end a sentence with?

GTB-Buckaroo posted:

And their cars were of course brought in as kits, not complete vehicles or there wouldn't have been any point...

The same as Land Rover did in Australia, South Africa and Spain... till Toyota undercut them in those markets and the Land Cruiser started to reign supreme of course.

Eloise posted:

GTB-Buckaroo posted:

And their cars were of course brought in as kits, not complete vehicles or there wouldn't have been any point...

The same as Land Rover did in Australia, South Africa and Spain... till Toyota undercut them in those markets and the Land Cruiser started to reign supreme of course.

The original Land Rover was designed this way I think it was called Knock Down Kit Form to allow easy transportation by our Armed Forces.

The Toyota Land Cruiser blitzed the Land Rover in Australia and the Middle East because it was far more reliable in the extremely hot conditions.