Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Secondly, let me break it gently to you: I don't want another Referendum. I was just indulging your deepest wishes. I, me personally, won the 1st and only Referendum and have no intention of doing best of however many it takes to give you a victory!

Hey something we agree on... I don't want another referendum either!  

I think Theresa May should stand up and say "You know what ... this leaving the EU lark is a really bad idea.  We held a referendum on it to try and placate you but the truth is the problems of the UK are our own fault and the EU aren't to blame.  So we're going to withdraw our Article 50 declaration and concentrate on actually doing what my campaign promised and build a country which works for everyone.  That might mean some more immigrants come in ... thats great because they help the economy grow.  And in growing that economy we will invest in the NHS so that it works for everyone; we will invest in housing and set minimum standards so that no one has to go homeless or put up with a home which isn't fit for habitation and we will invest in the infrastructure this country needs.  As my work over the last year has shown, we can grow trade with other nations outside the EU while keeping our important trade links with the EU through the Single Market and Customs Union".

Of course she won't do that ... but I don't want another referendum!

I like your logic Eloise and to keep the allusion slightly musical: "Nice Dream" 

I assumed it was tongue-in-each. 

With all the talk the Leave campaigns have about taking back control and about how the EU is ruled by unelected bureaucrats ... interesting how Boris Johnson's call for remain supporters to embrace the realities of Brexit and help make it work was held at the Policy Exchange a hugely influential think tank run by a body of unelected "thinkers" and who have directly influenced so much of Theresa May's thinking on Brexit.

Resurrection posted:

(http://themoneycharity.org.uk/money-statistics/);

of which unsecured debt accounts for "close to £300 billion".
(https://www.pwc.co.uk/who-we-a...ssing-millions1.html).

So the UK's just as bad!

"Eurozone Bad Debt"

You really do trip over your unassailable desire to be right. 

Oh, and I did trim the comment by abandoning the iPad for the MacBook.

How do you define Bad debt, particularly in an international context?

How do you distinguish this from doubtful debt, at least sufficiently to get precise figures.

Individual lenders can't agree, never mind individual countries.

By the Bloomberg statistics you quoted, the UK's current bad debt stands at £67bn the fifth highest quoted, and more than Germany, and both Portugal and Ireland which you quoted as particularly bad examples.  Furthermore you failed to mention that, according to those same statistics, overall the level of 'bad debt' in the Eurozone has decreased by more than 20% in the last 2 years and the rate of decrease is increasing.
(https://www.bloomberg.com/news...th-these-five-charts)

Overall the Eurozone isn't in too bad shape as it is now getting to grips with the problem and has it under control

 

Overall the Eurozone isn't in too bad shape as it is now getting to grips with the problem and has it under control

I guess that was what the Financial Times and Investors Chronicle might have been saying but somehow I doubt it. Don't you ever think you might be making a HUGE mistake putting so much faith in the EU?

Resurrection posted:

Been waiting on you Adam. I have some lovely fresh figures for you to digest. All is not so well in EU paradise.

"Eurozone bad debt, estimated at €944 billion, has hampered new lending and return on equity at all too many banks over the last decade. In absolute terms Bloomberg reports that Italian lenders are nursing a cool €224 billion in problem loans, followed by France with €142 billion and Spain €131 billion. As a percentage of total loans Greece and Cyprus have somewhere between 25 and 50 per cent of loans in arrears, Ireland, Portugal, and the Balkans between 10 and 25 per cent."

Obtuse  and assumptive enough for you?

Your quote in the second paragraph is factually incorrect:  That quote is from Investors Chronicle and is inaccurate.

The actual quote from Bloomberg is
"For European banks, it’s a headache that just won’t go away: the 944 billion euros ($1.17 trillion) of non-performing loans that’s weighing down their balance sheets."

Resurrection posted:

 

Overall the Eurozone isn't in too bad shape as it is now getting to grips with the problem and has it under control

I guess that was what the Financial Times and Investors Chronicle might have been saying but somehow I doubt it. Don't you ever think you might be making a HUGE mistake putting so much faith in the EU?

I'm not putting much faith in the EU, just as I'm not putting much faith in the UK government either, and certainly not putting any faith at all into the Brexit mantra when almost all the evidence indicates that it'll leave the UK worse off.

It seems that Brexit does require faith - it requires it in the same way as religion: To believe when all the objective evidence is to the contrary!

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Ha! Ha! Ha! "PERFORCE" - swallowing a dictionary won't retrieve your own illogical and humiliating arguments. Blimey, and we are expected  to believe that only JRM comes from the 19th Century 

I suspect that was more a typo of "of course". Of course I am didn't write the sentence myself so I wouldn't know...

Okay I find I am wrong and its a word ... 

Interesting how Resurrection objected to 'perforce' but didn't even mention my use of 'obfuscate'; curious. 

Interesting how Resurrection objected to 'perforce' but didn't even mention my use of 'obfuscate'; curious. 

 

That’s cos I used it first! ????

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

. 

 

So you can’t answer the question? It is clear to the rest of us that it is because you fear that in fact the majority of people really would like to remain in the EU. (And as previously indicated I am talking about a referendum before Brexit happens,)

Your senseless observation that there’s nothing to prevent a fresh referendum after Brexit has happened is not even worthy of comment. 

Firstly, apologies for including all of the above, my iPad won't play the game at the moment. 

Secondly, let me break it gently to you: I don't want another Referendum. I was just indulging your deepest wishes. I, me personally, won the 1st and only Referendum and have no intention of doing best of however many it takes to give you a victory!

However senseless you and other Remainers may think my comments you have not given me any justifiable reason other than to sit here and take potshots at your highly amusing and desperate whining. ????

So, the reason you don’t want another referendum is because you don’t want it. If that is your only or best reason, then is simply petulance, and I put it to you that deep down you recognise that the electorate would vote resoundingly not to Brexit, and the minority like you would lose your chance of gaining whatever it is you see as a gain from leaving, which is why you are afraid to let it go to a vote based on the greater knowledge poeple now have. Sad.

And it was you personally who won? I thought it was a vote on a decision choice, and not a competition, and even if the ‘camps’ were seen as competing sides (which they weren’t to me), are you declaring that your real identity is Nigel Farage, self-proclaimed leader of the Brexit campain?

By the way, who said best of how many times? And when exactly did I whine?

Brexit is obviously very wrong! How come that some people do not see it.

Frank Yang posted:

Brexit is obviously very wrong! How come that some people do not see it.

Yep, have been wondering that myself, Frank. Some people, eh!! ????

Resurrection posted:

It's obtuse as you're implying that a particular type of financial crisis in one subset of countries that obey specific fiscal rules, must perforce apply to a wider set of countries that do not have to comply with those fiscal rules.

That assumption is fundamentally flawed.

Furthermore, it can be seen by your continued defence of your implication above that: Either you don't understand the relationship between the Eurozone and the EU, or you know that the assumption (or implication) is fundamentally flawed and you are obfuscating matters to cover up the logical error.

Ha! Ha! Ha! "PERFORCE" - swallowing a dictionary won't retrieve your own illogical and humiliating arguments. Blimey, and we are expected  to believe that only JRM comes from the 19th Century 

Intrigued because I thought it was a word in normal usage, if not the most frequently encountered, I looked up ‘perforce’:

First: my copy of Chambers 20th Century Dictionary, published near the end of the century, lists perforce, but does not indicate it to be archaic or obsolete.

Miriam Webster online, presumably pretty much up to date, says that the definition by physical coercion is obsolete, but by saying that it makes clear that the alternative definition by force of circumstances is not obsolete.

And it is listed in the online Oxford Living Dictionaries, without any suggestion that it is archaic or obsolete.

Even if not the most commonly used word, or not in all circles, it is clear that it is accepted as being in current English usage. Methinks the laugh is on you.

Frank Yang posted:

Brexit is obviously very wrong! How come that some people do not see it.

Blind trust in the politicians advocating it?

Lack of comprehension?

Lack of critical thinking?

Lack of foresight?

Xenophobia?

An "anything's got to be better than this" sentiment?

'Little Britain' attitude?

Anti-establishment sentiment?

I've encountered all of these as underlying reasons for people for supporting Brexit.

And maybe even
      Pseudo-religious faith?

Resurrection posted:

Interesting how Resurrection objected to 'perforce' but didn't even mention my use of 'obfuscate'; curious. 

 

That’s cos I used it first! ????

So... It's all right when you "swallow a dictionary", but not all right when someone else uses a word that's not in common usage, unless you've used it first??

Huge posted:

Resurrection posted:

Interesting how Resurrection objected to 'perforce' but didn't even mention my use of 'obfuscate'; curious. 

 

That’s cos I used it first! ????

So... It's all right when you "swallow a dictionary", but not all right when someone else uses a word that's not in common usage, unless you've used it first??

Such inconsistency is entirely in keeping with someone doggedly pursuing a line of Brexit campaign won, the people have spoken, Brexit must happen - blinkers on, either not seeing or ignoring anything that inconveniently shows how ridiculously stupid it is. The amazing thing is that there it is propagated by otherwise obviously intelligent people, so one wonders about their motives - of course in the cases of people in power that sometimes is obvious, but what about others?

Huge posted:

It seems that Brexit does require faith - it requires it in the same way as religion: To believe when all the objective evidence is to the contrary!

Now that's an interesting thought, Huge. Must say your analogy would fit of the behaviour I've seen when some Brexiteers are interviewed on TV. Many simply trot out their assertions and ignore any questions about the mounting evidence of consequential economic damage or say such reports are 'wrong' but cite no counter-report.  It comes across to me as unquestioning faith, and like some religious evangelists they seem to think everyone else should accept 'the faith' just because they do. Perhaps we should be glad that they are politicians and not engineers, doctors or scientists.    

Indeed, that does hit it spot on.

that leads me to wonder if their religeon has a god, and who that is. ...Nigel Farrage, perhaps? (indeed, picking the earler hint, is that Resurrection’s real identity? In fact is his/her very moniker the significant detail we’ve been missing?) Otherwise Boris, Gove. The mind boggles...  But jigsaw pieces start to fall together...

Resurrection posted:

 

... and will also effectively shut up the people you often insultingly call remoaners.

- where did I say Remoaners above? Plot and lost comes to mind, IB.

'Often' - as in 'often'.

I'll give you the last one - and quotes.

Boris can see the writing on the wall. It’ll all be over soon.

That term remoaner will soon become obsolete, replaced with the term EUforian.

Ah, sorry boys and girls, been too busy scraping Remainders of my shoes prior to having a nice beef wellington for dinner. Too busy to play with you, but I am sure you are very much happier playing with yourselves. I have been notified of your conmmrnts and if I find anything of any substance I will respond. Still, as the bard said, you can ‘nurse yer wrath tae keep it warm.’, for all the good it will do you. ????

Defeated at last.

Resurrection posted:

Ah, sorry boys and girls, been too busy scraping Remainders of my shoes prior to having a nice beef wellington for dinner. 

Wellington: he needed allies to defeat Napoleon didn’t he? 

Innocent Bystander posted:

Defeated at last.

He * defeated himself before he even started.

I feel certain he won't shut up though.

*  I assume Resurection identifies as male, but without other information, I accept all other possibilities.

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Ah, sorry boys and girls, been too busy scraping Remainders of my shoes prior to having a nice beef wellington for dinner. 

Wellington: he needed allies to defeat Napoleon didn’t he? 

Yes, indeed, particularly the Prussians (aka Poles and Germans!).

We would have benefited form the EU then to stabilise Europe, rather than letting Napoleon try to unify it by force.
Strangely the Germans tried the same thing 100 years later, with much the same result.