Posts by codejunky

Why Uber isn't the poster child for capitalism you wanted

Erm

If Uber offers nothing new then what is the threat? Why is it such a concern that they apparently do nothing more than anyone else because surely they will struggle to differentiate itself and wont be a significant threat?

If Uber offers such awful terms in comparison to the others then nobody will work for them especially as they are not employees and take all the risk. It wont be worth it to anyone and nobody will do it then?

So if this comment article holds true then Uber has no workers and few customers. And so wont need regulating out of existence?

Something good about Brexit? Errr, more teeth for Ofcom! – report

Re: More regulation?

@ Doctor Syntax

"Because taking back control means HMG can do as it wants. The little people don't get control."

Compared to the EU does what it wants, HMG does what it wants and people have even less control?

UK PC prices have risen 30% in a year since the EU referendum

Re: @codejunky

@ MonkeyCee

"So the EU policies weren't really at fault"

Hang on. So you skip over an entire bunch of EU faults against our country to the very last bit where I also accept that our gov also implements EU rules badly? That is a severe case of selective reading.

"That the UK government has repeatedly done very unpopular things by implementing EU policy in a way that no other EU country has"

Do note this is by the pro-EU govs. The govs who sold us out to the EU and refused a referendum plus govs who campaigned to remain. The gov who was shocked we would dare vote leave even after they threatened us directly! Another good reason to vote out.

"I still expect these things will be sold as victorious compromises that BoJo and DDavies wrested from the EU."

Probably. I am not going to defend them.

"I'm not sure I'd be voting for them to try and take on more power"

Why would we accept them carrying on as is when it is even by your comment not good? And since there were no alternatives as the many 3 parties we all so bad UKIP became a legitimate threat which caused an actual vote finally offering actual change.

"I also expect many of those championing the Henry 8th powers will change their tune if their opponents get elected."

Almost certainly. We have authoritarian liberal anti-democrats not known for their sanity. The authoritarian labour gov with wet dreams of Venezuela. And an authoritarian tory gov we already can see plain. It is a good job a libertarian party (Farages UKIP) shook things up a bit and with home politics becoming important again people will hopefully care more. Instead of waiting for the federalising of the EU to conquer the country.

"I'm not a fan of the EU"

Then you voted leave? After your praise of the EU and dissing of national governments what you ment to say was you voted out of the EU? Do you think we would be better off without the EU and instead maybe stick to the economic area? Maybe you dislike the stupidly over specific regulations even over items such as jam and bananas? Maybe you disagree with how they handled the financial crisis plunging the Eurozone in to a desperate fight against deflation? Maybe you dislike their treatment of Greece to sacrifice a country to save a currency? Maybe you disagree with the EU's self inflicted financial mess leading them to be bailed out by the IMF? Maybe you dislike how Germany can unanimously inflict a migration and security crisis over the EU area? Maybe you disagree with their cartel actions locking out the poor countries from trade? Maybe you disagree with the childish demands in the Brexit negotiations for fantastical sums of money they have no right to or demand we fix their problem with Ireland?

Maybe other reasons? Maybe a combination of reasons? Or is that not what you ment?

Re: @codejunky

@ wolfetone

"when Thatcher was in power"

Wow thats a while back. She must be some kind of god to be so powerful. But anyway the US recovering, the UK recovering, the EU being bailed out by the IMF. And our contribution being abused to prop up their currency.

"I didn't say foodbanks were caused by Brexit,"

ok.

"The whole idea that food becoming cheaper when we leave the EU is a falicy."

Nope.

"Seasonal vegtables like strawberries are imported from places like Spain, which is in the EU."

The EU which uses trade tariffs to block out various countries (notably the poor needing trade) because they are cheaper. You might possibly be right about strawberry's as a single example. Substitution is a real thing and since parts of the world have been blocked out it is bound to have already happened.

"But what EU regulations have harmed this country? Be more specific like I asked."

The fact that we have to block out parts of the world because of the cartels tariffs (that is specific enough I would think?). The various climate change regulations. Various regulations from bendy bananas, jams, max power limits on electricals, etc.

"the rest of the EU will get along just fine without the UK"

Awesome. Tell them that. It was their presidents who claimed it would be the end of western civilisation and the break up of the EU.

"Who do the UK send? UKIP, who don't want to be in the EU."

Well that kinda demonstrates the rejection of the EU by us then doesnt it. I think Farage did a good job. He actually succeeded in getting us the vote.

Re: @codejunky

@ wolfetone

"Working order? How is the country broken?"

Economically not in a good place to deal with the next recession. Something which is resolving itself as the brexit result reduced the currency (as was required regardless) and is causing inflation which the gov and BoE have been aiming for for nearly 10 yr. A trade policy which requires we exclude parts of the world in order to be part of the cartel (for protectionist reasons of other members of the EU). Incompatible methods of applying law where we tend to say what you cannot do vs europe which tells people what they can do. Severe deficit in democracy as a vote on the EU has been long promised and even in eventual delivery (of a highly rigged vote) is being attacked by the undemocratic.

"The policies enacted that have caused the explosion in foodbanks"

Pre brexit vote. And we are still trapped in the cartel which dictates we block out parts of the world that would compete with the cartel members. Aka food becoming cheaper when we actually leave.

"The "EU cartel [...] attempts to blackmail us" how?"

Since the result by threatening us then begging us to stay. By direct attacks on the country such as attempting to demand Euro clearing is done in the EU (which would remove it from being an international reserve currency the idiots). By refusing to negotiate until we agree to a fantastical bill which even their negotiators dont believe can happen. By refusing to negotiate until we solve their problem (Irish border) to their satisfaction. Off the top of my head.

"paying your dues"

About £36bn I think it was found.

"how the EU have hindered our economy"

Bad trade policies. Abusing agreements (contribution used to bail out Greece). EU regulation imposed on our country. And of course our govs poor implementation of EU policies.

"Boris Johnson (the fuckwit)"

No argument there.

"if the UK leave the EU then he loses sales of prosecco to one country. The UK loses sales of fish and chips to 26 countries."

So the EU wont allow trade with us at all for any of their countries/businesses because they stomp their feet and wave a rattle around. Doubt it. It is in both our interests to agree to be amicable. If they cant manage that then we shouldnt pander to children.

Re: The Pound

@ Ian 45

"The pound collapsed, expect inflation."

About time isnt it. We were warned our currency was overvalued before the ref, and we have been trying to get inflation up for almost 10 yrs! At least now there is talk of increasing the base rate just like the US is planning. God help us if we were in the same position as the EU right now and of course another recession is about due.

Re: Markets are mostly psychology

@ wolfetone

"Now, I am acutely aware that those who think Brexit is a good idea no matter the outcome don't give an ounce of their own shit about my experience and/or how the pound has competed with the Euro and the Dollar since then"

I voted brexit and still think its a good idea but yes I do care about such experience. As far as I am concerned it is the cost of getting the country back to a working order (I am sure others may disagree) is more important than the warm feeling of the EU or whatever. Unfortunately we are still bound by the EU while the cartel threatens and attempts to blackmail us. Once out we are no longer bound by their trade rules and the more certainty the currency becomes more stable.

"how so many people can be so fucking stupid as to think Frau May is doing a wonderful job"

I am not sure they all do. I dont. But she is about the only option at the moment which is painful. The libs are still running on a platform of denial and labour doesnt know if it is coming or going on the subject. Personally I would have preferred Farage's UKIP as this would be resolved by now.

" stick two fingers up to Johnny Foreigner"

Some of us voted brexit to stop sticking fingers up at foreigners.

"It's OK to admit you're wrong and to change your mind.."

I tell this to remain voters plenty. But everyone is free to their own opinion and on polarising topics like this people dont like to admit they were wrong, kinda like when the Euro blew up and we stopped being called eurosceptics because we were right.

Btw you have upvotes from me because I too buy timber and yes it is more expensive.

Compsci degrees aren't returning on investment for coders – research

Re: More!

@ Cronus

Bob on. I ended up doing my full time degree while working for free developing for a small business. When we left uni it took my friends months up to a year to get various jobs (not all IT) while I was luckier.

Brit ministers jet off on a trade mission to tout our digital exports...

Re: Ha

@ Dan 55

""I still wonder what they got bribed with. Do you know?" is the same kind of loaded question. No proof but it paints whoever it is in a bad light."

So answer the question. It isnt loaded it is serious and simple. The Canada deal was held up, then it was finally allowed through by the single tiny gov that held it ransom. Why?

"If someone high up in an important EU country involved in the trade negotiations says the trade negotiations are dead, they're dead. Are you objecting to the fact he's German or something?"

Why would I have a problem with him being German? I did point out the huge fact (you obviously have a problem with) that Germany is not the EU and Germany saying it is dead does not mean it is dead. Obama certainly didnt seem to think so. Are you objecting to him being the black president of the US? (I know your not but its the same stupidity)

"I don't think you can say what you claimed based on his ramblings."

Maybe you just have something against US presidents? The EU promised that our contribution will not be used to bail out Greece. A signed agreement Cameron was proud of. And the EU went and did it anyway. Guess you dont trust the EU either?

"That Walstall article was written before the agreement was signed. It was signed later in the same month."

Cool. What did the EU finally agree to? Did they let the members decide or not?

"If they are, it's because they know the UK is desperate"

Eh? Countries want trade deals with us is somehow bad? Get the feeling your being negative again? What would you say if they didnt want to trade? Or that our gov is seeking trade deals as Kat Hall called "a desperate attempt". Almost as boring as the bad news "we voted to leave" good news "we aint left yet". Hence the label remoaner.

"You see, it's not just an EU media conspiracy."

Your right! You who sees nothing good, the EU who are trying to talk us down and a single article which doesnt seem to know what it is talking about. The best amusement being they quote a lib dem, not known for their impartiality on the subject. Pointing out EU states are forbidden from negotiating ignores that Canada is not a member. No need to go on I think.

"Why do you think inflation is a good thing with stagnant wages in an indebted economy?"

And now I see your problem. Lets start at the beginning. In 2008 there was a global recession. The UK and US did what they could to get out of recession and did so quickly. Since then the BoE (fed in the US) and governments have been trying to get inflation to start off. With inflation and full employment (again see US/UK) we get the pull to cause wage increases but also to regulate the inflation we increase the base rate. You may notice that the base rate is really low and so removes a method of dealing with recession? You may also notice that it is causing problems with skewing the market particularly housing?

Wages wont be increasing first. We had a major recession. I am sure you notice the IMF is bailing out the Euro (you neglected to acknowledge that). You may also have noticed the unemployment problem in the Eurozone. And the continual crisis due to the currency.

Re: Ha

@ Charlie Clark

"TTIP"

Good catch.

"This was all a long time before the US presidential election"

You may want to mention that to Obama. He was still pushing for this to go through before he left.

Re: Ha

@ Dan 55

"Has Rees-Mogg stopped beating his wife? I don't know, you don't know, but I'm going to pose the question anyway."

Hang on. So I ask a legitimate question and you call it 'whataboutery'. So you post the above?

"No, TTIP died at the end of August 2016 then Trump cancelled it so he could say he cancelled it, much like Trump wound up all those advisory councils after everyone left anyway."

Germany is the EU? I thought this whole EU thing was to have the negotiating power to be able to make trade deals like this? And it didnt seem so dead until Obama left as he was desperate for it to be his legacy and Clinton would have continued with it. Until trump killed it. And then rubbed the EU's nose in it by coming to us with negotiations. I hear the EU were planning on making any trade negotiation require we dont get the deal (think it was private eye) as it screws the idea that we are dead in the water.

"It seems the EU, Canada, and Japan have agreed to set up a Multilateral Investment Court."

Again i dont know if they have finally sorted this out- https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/07/06/that-eu-japan-free-trade-deal-isnt-settled-yet-heres-why/#315611467aaa

"The UK really needs tariff free trade to replace the tariff free trade it has now with the EU and it needs it ASAP"

Why? Some prices fall as we leave purely due to being outside the cartel. We already have countries interested in trade deals.

"Everyone knows the UK is desperate"

Who? The EU keep believing it then crying they cant get their own way when we use difficult words like- NO. They then stomp their feet, complain negotiations aint going anywhere then refuse to negotiate until we accept 100% what they want. And around we go again.

"Let us count the positive things...

End of list."

As I said you are not managing your expectations, you are just negative. Thats fine, but you might as well realise you are refusing to see any positive when there is plenty. For example you might notice-

>some inflation (BoE and gov been trying to do this for almost a decade)

>leading to rate increases (BoE and gov been trying to do this for almost a decade)

>house prices levelling out (BoE and gov been trying to do this for almost a decade)

If you want an amusing train of thought- The great recession hits 2008! The US and UK do what they can to get out of recession (and we do). The Eurozone (read EU) dont.... and eventually have to do what they can to avoid deflation. The US is looking to raise rates. The UK is considering it now after the brexit vote. The Eurozone (read EU) is still years behind in the recovery and desperately trying to get anywhere. Right now the IMF is bailing out the Euro (Greece). The EU is being bailed out by the IMF currently while their massively stalled economy struggles.

Re: Ha

@ Dan 55

"Ah, a fine bit of whataboutery."

I assume that means you also dont know. Since we are talking trade and it was highly valid to the point I wonder 'whataboutery' answering the freaking question instead of brushing it off because you dont like it?

"The EU gave up negotiating TTIP because it was politically unsustainable."

Wow thats a new narrative. Wasnt it really that Obama wanted a successful deal, the EU was gagging for it as it isnt a bad thing to want, Obama sticks his nose where it dont belong and Trump takes the offer away from the EU and hands the offer to the UK.

As I joked before the referendum, if you are against TIPP you are both in favour of remain and leave. Remain because no way will all the members agree to it, leave because the EU wants it really badly and will do anything to get it.

"A FTA with the US means privatising everything US business wants access to and lowering standards."

Bull, balls and FUD. Didnt somebody mention lowering our electrical standards because of the EU? I may try and find who wrote the comment it sounded pretty clued up.

"As for Japan, I believe the FTA was signed in July. Is there any remaining work to be carried out?"

The Japan deal was announced a success. However it wasnt at the time (no idea if it is even now) because the EU and Japan couldnt agree on conflict resolution which basically was a deal breaker. To bypass this issue the EU was considering leaving that part out of the proposals for the vote and then resolving it without the members permission.

"The UK will be negotiating from a position of weakness"

Well thats a mistake.

"The key thing the UK has to offer apart from lowering regulations is loosening visa requirements"

What are you talking about? We dont need a fancy agreement to trade with others outside the EU. And at WTO tariffs things outside the EU will already be cheaper. That is before deals.

"With certain subjects like Brexit I find it's useful to manage expectations. Hasn't failed me so far."

Then why dont you see anything positive? Unless by manage you mean negative. You say it hasnt failed you so far yet you keep railing against something which has so far been pretty positive.

Re: Ha

@ Charlie Clark

"It doesn't worry the EU at all because the UK will at best get access to the single market on current terms."

Which is why a half arsed brexit isnt brexit. If we must be part of the cartel to access the cartel and we are leaving the cartel then it is very easy to work out we are leaving. Only by snatching defeat from the jaws of victory will we end up still trapped in the cartel.

"But you're promised lower prices might well worry the low-skilled who've seen their real incomes decline over the last few years"

Eh? Why? because prices go down? If the cost of living goes down then people spend less on their expenses and so have more money. Hence it is a good thing for people, the economy and particularly the poor.

"How about replacing EU migrant workers with those from China, Vietnam or Angola? Sounds like a real vote winner to me!"

What have you got against foreigners? From the EU or outside? Why is it so difficult for my US, Russian and Vietnamese friends to come over yet much easier for someone from the EU? Amusingly Russia is in Europe so it isnt about more Europe or being European. Why not treat them all the same and that means relaxing a little outside the EU and tightening up on the EU? What is wrong with equality?

"Oh, and, of course, we know there's £350 million a week been found behind the same sofa that found extra money for Northern Ireland"

Eh? I assume you have read some news I havnt seen yet or something.

What amuses me most is how the point in my first post has been ignored that the UK is called desperate for seeking trade deals yet the attempts by the EU are not. No matter how badly the EU screws up.

Re: Ha

@ Dan 55

"To try an avoid that very embarrassment of a free trade deal with Canada"

I dont think May can encounter the same problem the EU had over the trade deal with Canada. The EU fearing other members may leave hands over the point of the EU (trade) to the governments and are held ransom by a tiny proportion. I still wonder what they got bribed with.

"If the UK is at the front of the queue for hormone-injected beef, chlorinated chicken, and a privatised NHS, I think it's best that there isn't one."

The you must have seriously rejected the EU who were gagging on their knees for the US deal and not only was it snatched from them but given to us instead.

"Japan has made it known that it's not particularly interested in the UK out of the single market and customs union."

Japan also disagrees with the EU. Japan wanting the international standard for problem resolution and the EU wanting the out of date and unjust version. This massive sticking point stopping the agreement being made.

"It takes years to get a FTA. The UK has to do about 30 in a year and a half to be in the same place as it is now currently in the EU."

If measured in FTA's maybe. But since we wont be within the cartel we wont need to punish the poor globally and instead will see prices falling as we dont need to freeze them out of trade any more. This is something that worries the EU as any trade deal with them could give us the best of both worlds which is why they are desperate to demand we cant be allowed a competitive advantage.

All of your comment of course being crafted to be as negative as possible

Ha

@Kat Hall

"In a desperate attempt to improve our international trade prospects"

I am sure that is how you would word it when the EU is out making their desperate attempts at international trade prospects. Please tell me this is how you described the embarrassment that was the Canada trade deal, the jumping of the gun with the Japan trade deal (is it done yet?) and of course the further embarrassment of losing the US trade deal while the UK is at the front of the queue.

BoJo, don't misuse stats then blurt disclaimers when you get rumbled

@ Tigra 07

Being correct isnt enough. It must also pander to the preconceived conclusion of the reader or it is a lie. Personally I would prefer him to stop chucking that figure around and still think his official leave campaign was geared toward making the remain campaign look good.

EU's tech giant tax plan moves forward

Re: @ J. Smith

@ DavCrav

"There is a difference between unintended loopholes and very specific rules designed to encourage something. You know they are different things, stop being silly."

This is the argument of law. Our laws have generally been designed around the idea of telling us what not to do, not the restrictive and oppressive concept of dictating what we can.

Re: And in DC the US Treasury is not happy

@ strum

"What's the product? You and me - and Google get us (nearasdammit) for free."

Actually I was thinking of all the services they offer such as searchability, advertisement and demonstration facilities (e.g. youtube) which are available for small businesses and big. If you gonna boohoo that Google has some data of yours I would suggest not giving it to them. Its your freedom to trade.

"That would be the Laffer 'curve' where Prof. Laffer could never identify the optimum point on the 'curve' where his diminishing returns ceased to diminish?"

On which form of taxation? Each form having its own dead weight effect on the economy so 'optimal' (a debatable word) is dependent on the type. Also if your hoping for a single point instead of a margin then you cannot be serious. Finally are you seriously disputing the existence of the Laffer curve? I thought that was only a fringe issue.

"and hardly anyone ever gets elected by proposing higher taxes"

As labour proved. Except they did, and over and over. With the prime method by claiming them over there get taxed but not you. Then they do.

"This alt-right assumption that da gummint is out to get you is childish."

It was actually the common opinion only a decade ago as drivers were targeted. The tax bands didnt move with inflation, stealth tax's, etc.

"Bullshit. In most cases (99.99%), share-holders are nothing more than gamblers; they haven't put any money into businesses."

Pensions, ISA's and so on. What do you have against people? Also in what way have they not put money into a business? Stocks and bonds are about putting capital into a business to help it grow and provide higher returns (which should be the desire of us all surely?).

Re: And in DC the US Treasury is not happy

@ ardj

"Any snide reference to the Laffer curve"..."maximizing tax rate might be around 70%"

I would suggest you reread my comment. What snide remark did I make about the Laffer curve? I made a solid remark about the Laffer curve for DavCrav's suggestion of 99.9999% (99.9999% > 70%). You may also notice the part in the same paragraph concerning dead weights of taxation too. I do believe (I might be wrong) that 70% is the total taxation extracted from a person which we are fairly close to for some.

"As for your proposition that governments will continue to take ever more tax"

Examples of the reverse are few. In fact there seems to be a socialist resurgence where people are willing to state the many failed examples 'didnt do it right' or as for Venezuela they praised until it failed and now go quiet. All while not quiet demanding what they think they are demanding.

"you seem to be living in the fantasy world of barter that you attribute to the former USSR"

I have no idea what you are on about, maybe you have taken something from the comment that wasnt there or maybe you had a really good weekend and are still getting over it (apologies if its the first and my writing wasnt clear enough for you). From my understanding the USSR clamped down hard on private businesses at times in excess of taxing 99.9999%.

"Do you seriously believe that shareholders are punished by having to pay tax ?"

Actually I acknowledge tax has the effect of a punishment as it traditionally is used to tax sins (tobacco, alcohol, etc) and to take a cut of trade activity occurring under the jurisdiction of the ruler. That second part is generally for infrastructure, but both have the same effect of reducing some economic activity. That is why it works so well as a punishment or 'sin tax' to change peoples behaviour. My comment to DavCrav was to highlight the statement he made about customers being people but so are shareholders and to remove the dividing lines (customer/shareholder) to point out both are people. Which makes sense after poking the flaws in his comment about only affecting one group (a classic division tactic to claim one group will pay but not the other. But often both do).

Re: And in DC the US Treasury is not happy

@ DavCrav

"suppose that the tax rate were 99.9999% of profit."

That would be the Laffer curve and rates above that were trialled in the last century by the USSR. In the great experiment that was (and is in certain places) it was demonstrated that centrally planned economies dont work. While an amount of taxation is required there are different dead weights on the economy depending on how you extract the money.

"They will have to eat some of the costs themselves, because they can't all be passed on."

That is possible. But it wont be their payouts that will suffer this it will be their expenses, their costs. That means potentially reducing their investments in innovation or service (i.e. people in reducing jobs or wages).

"Meanwhile, consumers benefit from having reduced taxes themselves (or not having increased taxes, which is the same thing) to the value of 100% of the incerased tax take, more than balancing out the resultant inflation."

Really? Government, the consumer of all and more will somehow not crave more tax? Governments could take 100% and would still want more so why tax payers wont get shafted by more tax is uncertain. Plus the loss of revenue that Google creates through the existence of its services to smaller businesses which may rely on it (see newspapers when Google stopped crawling them) and the cost to the people could be vastly more that what is taken from Google. Add Amazon to that and bang to the smaller business.

"People pay in the end, absolutely, but shareholders are people too."

Share holders giving their spare money to fund business which employs people and provides the products and services we want. Why on earth would we want to punish them? Maybe the govs should just control their spending a bit?

Re: And in DC the US Treasury is not happy

@ Doctor Syntax

"I suppose it would be too much to hope that they'd stop and ask if the advertising is worth the cost. Yes, it would be too much to hope"

Is that a good thing? To make a product too expensive for the many? Google has already been accused of a monopoly position with most people using it to find items from all kinds of providers/retailers big and small. So raise the price removes some of the smaller shops and puts people out of business maybe, and thats good?

I am actually quite happy for the EU to knacker itself by removing the point of paying in the country hosting the European HQ as long as we aint dumb enough to follow suit. The reason we do this is we want competition to reduce corporate tax because that is how we benefit. Either way this will make the EU look less attractive again which not only reduces the threat of companies leaving but may also give companies consideration to come this way.

Re: EU - making it up as they go along

@ Zog_but_not_the_first

I get the feeling staunch remainers and brexiters have a lot in common. The problem seems to be nationalists and xenophobes which again can be in either camp.

Just how are HMRC’s IT systems going to cope with Brexit?

Ha

So the people who take money off everyone are going to have a hard time? I cant imagine people feeling too sorry for them although I cant imagine it will take long to figure out how to take our money.

Act fast to get post-Brexit data deal, Brit biz urges UK.gov

Re: £240bn

uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-trade/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner-idUKKCN1BP1IU

It would appear the EU do want a trade deal with the UK as a priority. Unfortunately their road blocks are getting in the way. Although this comes from "one of six Commission vice presidents at the EU executive" so maybe the rest of the committee disagrees or want to add 2 heads, 3 humps and 12 legs?

Re: Fiddlesticks

@ Doctor Syntax

"That's because keeping in with the US is important to the rest of the EU"

Which is why it is funny that now the UK is at the front of the queue for a trade deal with the US and the EU isnt even at the back.

Re: £240bn

@ Lars

"You are such an optimist, EU in shock and such"

Not really. The shock comment was due to the news that the EU was suddenly upset about such a fact. As far as I remember I read it on the independent which is not brexit supporting. I dont need to be an optimist when the remain campaign basically stated the massive benefits of leaving, even if they framed it as bad news.

"Should I point out that Britain like many other EU countries belong to NATO and that Britain does not have any specific British rules regarding NATO"

I know that is why it amused me. I am guessing this is some extra intelligence sharing or something. I have no idea but it seems important enough to make the EU upset.

"I still think you just cannot comprehend that the EU is not a "country" but a union of 28 independent countries."

Actually keeping up with this, Junker has already made some sort of statement about core countries having to join the Euro, when we voted leave a French/German group was tasked with finding a way to 'sell' federalising (this was around the time of the brexit 'problem' being identified as needing more EU). Amusingly when people point out the 70's vote was not for the EU (which didnt exist) remainers tend to claim the aim was known and understood back then. Also we are negotiating with the supranational EU and banned from negotiating with the remaining 27 countries as they are not independent and have been banned by the EU from negotiating. Actually this is part of the economic and sovereign argument of leaving as the EU is a supranational government which has removed the independence of member countries and seeks to go further.

"As for British exports and imports (the world 2016 est) $412.1 billion and $581.6 billion."

So? Can you relate this to the discussion which is my reply to a previous comment about financial services data.

"About 4-5 months ago on Yahoo"

I dont use Yahoo. I am amused it still exists I will go check it out later.

"EU countries trying to "steal" some of the euro clearing from London"

I remember the hostile views from the EU and the disappointment they had when they were laughed off. The amusing problem for them being that they want the Euro to be an international reserve currency, which requires Euro clearing world wide, yet want to complain the Euro is cleared outside the EU in London.

Re: £240bn

@ Voland's right hand

"The financial services rely on the data deal"

Considering over 70% of the euro clearing is done in the UK and the EU failed to get a UK exodus of banks it really would be beneficial to both sides to cooperate.

I hear the EU got a shock recently when they realised they do rely on our military services and that doesnt mean they can automatically assume such support if we cannot negotiate a deal. The EU seemed upset at their lack of will to negotiate resulted in them not negotiating the access they want.

UK's new Data Protection Bill will be 'liberal' not 'libertarian', says digi minister

@ iron

I was also going to point out the difficulties of applying effective age verification especially on servers outside the UK. Surely this should be an educational thing and not a 'banned for your own freedom' thing.

Google will appeal €2.9bn EU fine

Re: Google has a monopoly in 13 out of the 14 top commercial functions of the web

@AC

"It is based around the concept of "significant market power". Do you have the power to distort the market or not."

And such is the problem of success. Google is a successful company. They are successful by not sitting on the one thing they already do but by also branching out and developing further. By the mere problem of being successful they have the ability to look to doing something else and hire the best people + infrastructure and absorb the loss if it fails.

So how can Google do anything without the success of its name and financial status almost certainly giving it significant market power?

Re: Google has a monopoly in 13 out of the 14 top commercial functions of the web

Google has a contestable monopoly in 13 out of the 14 top commercial functions of the web

Daily Stormer binned by yet another registrar, due to business risks

@ Kaltern

"There is a reason why Nazi-ism is completely abhorred by the vast majority of the human race."

Yes. This is correct and as a result these people would have difficulty having their views accepted in the real world. So why do we fear them and insist they must be kept away from people? The reason people have such a problem with nazism is because we remember it, we discuss it and we critique it. It is a subject we discuss and analyse to the point that WW2 basically lives on the history channels.

I do however have a problem with people opposing nazism when they oppose only the label. There is an automatic learned reflex against the label nazi but not communist (in Europe). The nazi take over of Germany is rightfully hated and watched against, but yet communists are not? The concentration camps and gas chambers for mass extermination are hated, gulags not so much. Fear of the right wing parties for any even minor action or belief which can be even marginally compared to nazi is exploited, not so much the left and communist.

The worst part is we were happy to crush nazis, yet persist in this daft notion of socialist where it has inflicted more death and suffering around the world than nazism and continues to do so! I read insane stupidity (some of you may have also seen it) where an uneducated idiot writes "far right gave us *insert evil* while far left gives us *insert milk and honey*". And unfortunately there are idiots (I find often its HE students) who actually believe this and display a level of ignorance just as insulting as denying the holocaust.

But when people forget and the evil is allowed to shrink out of view people forget. People think it is exciting and new and a solution to problems. As far as I can see there are two ways to deal with such a problem-

1) Brush it under the carpet and hope it dies out (often only the memory dies out, the desire remains in the shadows waiting for its time).

2) Education. Honesty. Discussion. Only by understanding the problems and why it was such a problem can we actively choose to avoid it.

Heard the one about the two landmark EU data rights' rulings? These countries haven't

Re: That's wierd

@ Alt C

At least you seem to know what your talking about even if we disagree about it being positive or consumer protection. We already have laws concerning labelling what is in foodstuffs so precise and over specific laws dictating do seem pretty far out to me.

I am of the opinion that centrally planned economies dont work, based on the centrally planned economies failing vs less restricted ones. The issue becomes interesting if the genus of banana for example is wiped out or severely damaged by disease just as previous ones have and customers want something with a different characteristic. It requires either the over specific laws to be ignored (as over specific old laws tend to) and everyone to technically be criminal or for the law to be updated by a lumbering and slow bureaucracy.

Same applies with jam for example that the customer desires something, a producer can produce it, but for some reason of pure stupidity it cannot be called what it is because it doesnt meet the exceptionally tightly defined criteria (very specific list of fruits) to be called jam. This is petty micromanaging which customers and retailers can achieve themselves without the gentle caressing hand of a lumbering government bureaucracy to screw up.

Trade is desire. We want something so we trade for it. At no point does that say the gov needs to specifically and dictatorially specify what very specific things must absolutely be called.

Re: That's wierd

@ Alt C

"er no they made claiming your product was one thing when it was something else an offence just like we have the misrepresentation act 1967 as part of contract law."

Eh? We had standards, they created a criminal law. The difference? One is a standard and if you dont meet it you will not be trusted in future (traded with). Vs its a law with fines and/or prison time.

"Please stop reading everything the daily fail tells you"

I dont read the daily mail. Shall I assume you get your information from EU pamphlets?

"I can only think from your statement you voted to leave because you are against consumer protection which is what that particular EU directive was about"

You are right I voted leave, but you are completely wrong about my views on consumer protection. I cant say I consider the shape of a banana a protection issue. I dont see how defining the exact fruits which can be made into a spreadable jelly to be acceptable to the name Jam and everything else excluded. Are you seriously saying that Europeans are so incredibly thick (UK is in Europe too) that they feel a banana is misrepresented as a banana if it is shaped slightly different? Are you claiming Europeans are so thick they need jam to be a restricted set of fruits or they will get confused?

Now personally I give Europeans and most people of this world more credit than that. And certainly dont consider it a criminal matter.

Re: That's wierd

@ Alt C

"you mean the bananas that we (UK) catagorised by size and shape for trade before the EU standardised the rules? - good grief if that's your knowledge of the EU no wonder you voted to leave."

You do know it wasnt a law. The EU made it criminal. The EU actually made the shape of a banana criminal! Yup I know why I voted leave.

@ Doctor Syntax

"Are you a greengrocer?"

No. I am also not an MEP nor an MP nor politically affiliated but I do make voting decisions based on politics. And not just the policies that directly affect me either!

Re: That's wierd

@ Pascal Monett

And in response I say banana's. Or jam.

UK.gov launches 'co-ordination hub' for driverless car industry

Re: Apples and Pears

Often designed to be the least intuitive and blocked by one way systems and bike/taxi/bus only sections only a minion of the devil himself could truly appreciate.

Climate-change skeptic lined up to run NASA in this Trump timeline

Re: I don't mine a skeptic. I prefer a skeptic in this position

@ DougS

"NASA just launches the satellites that get the data, they don't do any interpretation of it so whether its director is a skeptic, a denier or a believer doesn't really matter."

A little niggle with that statement. A while back Lewis Page put up a wonderful article about NASA 'adjusting' its data and publishing it online. This data suddenly showed a huge steep incline that was so fantastical that even the IPCC (not considered a good source of fact) wouldnt agree with NASA's amusing graph.

I can understand why people would be sceptical and I am too. This is such an important problem that the UK had a gov who ditched power generation for monuments to the sky god. This green tech actually didnt work but the denial of that fact was so extreme it was very much religious. We have also been told many times we have x days to save the world only for nothing to be resolved or changed. We have been told of terrible horrors which have been hyperbole at best and the only thing we have seen for it is more cost and higher tax.

Smart meters: 'Dog's breakfast' that'll only save you 'a tenner' – report

Re: Benefits

@ Doctor Syntax

"unless we crawl back to the EU to rejoin on whatever terms they choose to offer (bye by GBP)."

Something about that line bothered me and it took a moment before it hit me. Isnt that your desirable outcome? Not necessarily the leaving and crawling back, but the accepting of the EU's terms and adoption of the Euro?

I am going to generalise across what I see of remain arguments I have encountered so I understand if this doesnt fit you exactly-

Way back when people like me were called eurosceptic and before we were proved right the argument for the currency was pretty much the same as in/out of the EU that nobody would trade with us and we would be little england if we didnt. But the currency of the EU is the euro and some believe the vote in the 70's was for the EU United States of Europe federalisation etc. Which surely requires we adopt the euro.

Also the referendum was started with cameron promising huge changes (or he will campaign to leave) which he never got (he claimed victory but the EU would need a unanimous vote on the piddly changes once the result was in). And for ever closer union we would surely be required to fall in line even more to belong to a federalised superstate.

Also the EU has demonstrated it cannot be trusted to abide by agreed terms. Cameron claimed victory that our EU contribution would not be used to prop up Greece (the euro) and had such signed by the EU itself. Then our contribution was used to prop up Greece and the euro (our successful currency to prop up their collapsing one). Which would suggest the EU (pre-federalised) is more important than the members (take into account the damage the EU inflicted on Greece and other EU countries). So the stated aim of glorious union (remain) must be all for that and accepting of hard times to remain a member?

Hmm

I see a lot of blaming energy companies but I am somehow feeling sorry for them. First the energy generation in this country has been allowed to fall apart as labour opted for monuments to a sky god and solar panels instead of power generators. They compounded the problem when Blair offered to half our co2 output (instead of halve it in one area of production against advice) and of course their capitulating to the green nutters who opposed nuclear.

All of that pushes up the cost of power generation and then the power companies get the blame for political stupidity. As far as I am aware the energy companies didnt want smart meters, it was the gov for another tax funded blowout.

We can easily fix the energy production problem. We can easily fix the cost of energy problem. We have plenty of experience over a large portion of the planet to do this. But it requires honesty and political will to admit the failures and wasted money before deciding how we want to proceed.

Re: Benefits - *cough* 1972 *cough*

@ strum

"And how the fuck could they have known who that was? Sheesh!"

So glad you vanquished that stupid minority voted out so its invalid claim. Since having only a minority support to remain some of them do like to think the non-voters somehow represent their beliefs.

Re: Benefits

@ Doctor Syntax

"Unless we're presented with the results of the negotiation to approve or reject we've been committed to the result of a slim advisory vote"

If we are allowed to vote on the outcome we just need to be abused into retracting. The idea that we should not be allowed to leave and every obstacle should be placed before the majority result is enacted is anti-democratic. As slim the victory was it was a majority decision and to democratically change your mind later is fine, but after. After requires we brexit and get on with it for a bit.

"crawl back to the EU to rejoin on whatever terms they choose to offer (bye by GBP)."

If that is what people want after we have left and given it a shot then fine. Chances are by then we will have a clearer picture of what the EU will be- the same (sinking ship), federalised (the UK has always rejected this) or common trade area (which people seemed to like). Maybe the EU will do something else or crash out with the next recession, who knows.

"This (apart from "Your") is something on which we can agree"

Feel free to ignore mistakes like that. I am dyslexic and have no interest in the extra effort to figure out the correct adjustment of awkward character sequences.

"There should have been referenda"

I can agree on referenda but I am sure there is a lot of debate as to the correct terms. Labour did promise such but Blair lied and sold the country badly (could have been worse if Brown didnt hate him) which didnt do the pro-EU argument any favours. The severe deficit of democracy has been a big problem with our membership. Especially because the outcome was known and not what they wanted.

Re: Benefits

@ Terry 6

"on the back of a lacklustre Remain campaign"

Really? Granted the remain campaign was rubbish but thats because there isnt a great deal of justification to remain. However the referendum was rigged, public money spent on propaganda for remain, lies/misrepresentation and hyperbole, foreign leaders invited to threaten us and our own chancellor directly threatening the population to vote remain.

The remain campaign stitched things up so badly that their complaints directly after the result (no brexit plan, etc) were the direct result of the remain supporting government.

Re: Benefits

@ Loyal Commenter

You may need to look up... the page a few comments. Both of your 'points' have been clearly addressed with my responses to MGJ and an AC.

I would also suggest you get that cough looked at

Re: Benefits

@AC

"I seem to remember there was some kind of vote in the 70s, which went 67%-32%, much more decisive than the 48%-52%.

Of course, the UK had tried repeatedly (I wonder why?) to join the club throughout the decade before."

Your right. But since the EU did not exist then you are probably remembering a different vote. Maybe something to do with a common market?

And yes the UK tried repeatedly to join the club. But as MGJ pointed out above, such decisions can be reversed. And this time with the people actually getting a choice!

Re: Benefits

@ MGJ

"Oh, was it just decisions you approve of that can never be overturned?"

That is such a cute argument and its such a recent one as the others consistently fall apart. Although to think about it this is the first vote on our membership of the EU and we have yet to implement the result. But you want to overturn the result of a democratic choice before it is implemented because you dont like the result. So you want a 'democratic' vote to undo the democratic vote that has yet to be applied? And if it doesnt return the result you want I guess we will have to do it again (as that is the implication of what your saying anyway, revote because you dont like the result).

Re: Benefits

@ Steve Davies 3

"My guestimate is that the bill will be around £60B minimum or £1000 for every one of us.

Do we still want this? Will we get a chance to have our say on the final deal?"

You do know the bill is the cost of already being in that we agreed to before the referendum? Whatever you believe the bill will come to if it is too expensive for you to consider leaving a good idea, you must absolutely support leave because remaining will cost far more.

Personally I will be unhappy if the gov pays more than our currently agreed costs (I think it was assessed around £36bn) as we have no good reason to pay the EU for the privilege of leaving. Something we are doing regardless.

Also no we wont have a choice on the final deal. If that was on offer then the EU just have to be total tossers and pretend we will be doomed to coerce the vote. Just like the remain campaign did for the referendum and remainers continue to do. Remember it was the pro EU gov who issued a direct and clear threat against the population if we didnt vote how they wanted. And some now seek to overthrow democracy. What scares me is the nutters demanding democracy is overthrown because we didnt vote their way!

Re: Benefits

@ Len Goddard

"Best argument for brexit I've seen so far."

Just one of many. Both for rules and for reduced costs

UK.gov wants quick Brexit deal with EU over private data protections

Re: the government made it absolutely clear this referendum was not advisory

@ H in The Hague

"Were the voters aware that also meant leaving the single market and the customs union"

Were remain voters aware that the claims of economic doom were nothing like and the 'affects' were actually the very things the BoE and gov have been trying to do since 2008? Were the remain voters aware of what the EU will become (they are still not sure yet) as it cannot survive in its current form? Or that the direct threat made by George Osborne (punishment budget) to the country was just a threat of economic devastation and nothing to do with the practicalities of leaving?

The question was simplistic but it was a heavily rigged vote with the 'right' answer which would be a permanent expression of voters opinion and the other answer. But so far this is the nearest to honest choice offered to people and the result was shockingly to leave even under direct threat and extreme propaganda.

Re: There 'May' come a time

@ Roland6

Very cool. Good catch. It isnt the US it is the world. It is good that they point out the EU's declining share of the economy while others are increasing.

Cheers for the fact check

Re: There 'May' come a time

@ nsld

"Take the ECJ, if they tell the EU27 that something is not compliant or doesn't meet standards/GDPR et al (the list is endless) then thats game over for whatever that sector is involved in."

Exactly the same for EVERY COUNTRY WE TRADE WITH. We sell more to the US than the EU, should we surrender the country to trump instead of the EU? Or should we stand on our own 2 feet?

"You can keep your dream of empire alight but in the cold light of day we are a small island in a world which has moved on greatly since we conquered much of it and gave them our civil service as a lasting legacy"

Why are some remain supporters so stuck in the past? I have no dream of an empire, not Brittish nor EU. Nor do I care for the cold war trading blocks like USSR or EU. Its almost as amusing as those insisting brexiters want a 1970's throw back when the EU was built on the old world model. Even the fear of leaving other countries in the world that the EU protects us from is such old world thinking.