|
Best Porn Sites | Live Sex | Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
Politics, Current Affairs, Religion Threads Post here for all Politics, Current Affairs, Religion Threads |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
March 15th, 2016, 09:12 AM | #111 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The North
Posts: 170
Thanks: 1,106
Thanked 1,950 Times in 160 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
The government might support terrorists in Syria for religious reasons but the main reason is, like most issues in the world, one of money and big business. The simply and sad fact is that ISIS and their ilk have been good for business. Syria is a country with nationalization and is likely to increase nationalization. Eliminating the government of Syria and replacing them with groups that will not nationalize is in the best interests of the US, the UK, Israel and, of course, Turkey. It just so happens that the group of people most likely not to nationalize industry in Syria are also religious extremists. It is the same old story as with Afghanistan and Libya. So no, Erdogan is not supporting terrorists in Syria because they are Muslim extremists; no more than Israel is supporting them for being so. Quote:
Erdogan has support neo-liberal policies as much as religious ones. Infact Erdogan's Justice and Development party's main platform is big business. It is not an Islamic party though it has favoured religious themes that go against the Turkish constitutions and have been criticized within Turkey for doing so. Like most conservative neo-liberals, Erdogan does use religion as a tool to achieve capital, but it is unlikely that he will manage to make Turkey a religious state and, going back to the point I was actually addressing, it is unlikely that the EU will incorporate Islamic principles that are controversial within Turkey itself.
__________________
“Get to fighting or get away.” |
|||
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Attila The Hun For This Useful Post: |
April 17th, 2016, 05:22 PM | #112 | |
緑の男
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Jockistan, UK.
Posts: 8,316
Thanks: 39,016
Thanked 122,402 Times in 8,316 Posts
|
Quote:
Being 24 back then [but certainly no more sophisticated than you I am sure] I wasn't sure how to vote but the EEC was presented to us as a glorified trade agreement and, given the parlous state of the UK at that time, it seemed as if it couldn't make anything worse than it already was. SO I voted to stay in.. |
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to otokonomidori For This Useful Post: |
April 17th, 2016, 05:52 PM | #113 | ||
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,237
Thanks: 162,388
Thanked 278,408 Times in 26,182 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
I had noted at the age of seven how decimalisation, which at this distance in time I can see was a stealthy preamble for us to get ready for the European Project, had led to an instant hike in prices: my pocket money no longer bought 4oz of jelly babies. I was young and thick but I wasn't too thick to pick up on that. A shilling became 5 new pence but 9d became 4p instead of 3.5p; this told me quite a lot about life very quickly. So when we joined the EEC without a referendum in 1973, I wasn't taken in by the weights and measures malarkey and the people who thought it was great that butter weighed 250g for the same price as butter at 227g (8oz). I used to watch BBC regional news after the main 6 O Clock news with Richard Baker (remember him) and I remember the German Christmas shoppers who used to roll up in Hull because the clothes and goods prices were much cheaper because we were not in the EEC. I knew from that that the EEC would lead to higher indirect taxation, exactly as it has. One other thing I remember is the system for funding the EEC; which eventually led to Mrs Thatcher's clash with Mitterand and Kohl and the British rebate, which leaves us a major contributor. I was quite clear that we were getting fourpence for ninepence and I thought it was not right.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
||
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to scoundrel For This Useful Post: |
April 17th, 2016, 08:56 PM | #114 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Halfwitistan
Posts: 5,715
Thanks: 113,479
Thanked 59,962 Times in 5,707 Posts
|
The 18yr old Harold had a vote and used it to go in.
The politicians (who in those days one still thought honest) said it was a trade agreement in the best interests of the UK. Besides I am a European, British - yes but my heritage is also German - Polish and I revel in the variety of cultures in Europe. Germany wunderbar, France mervielle, etc. They LIED. They lied through their useless teeth. I can put up with the petty rules and regulations, hypocracy and snout in the trough politicians but the basic premise of Monet and followed by so many since that the project is more important than the people, that the people running the project had to lie because the people would not accept the truth (f*cking true that one) and that the people running the project knew more and were better than the hoi polloi. Well thank you very much but NO! NO, NO, NO. When the British PM has to go and beg some unelected (and dodgy) Civil Servant permission to reduce the tax on Tampons then the time has come to sack it. Google Junkers Quotes and you will see the reason to leave. But if you want the worse thing. Cameron had the chance to really do something useful. Get together and agree with the other pissed off leaders of the EU states and deal with the EU Commission. Get the whole bunch of them and sack them. Once sacked investigate what the have done and jail as appropriate. What did he do - get some vague and dubious promise to limit immigration. As someone who wants to be a member of a democratic and functioning Europe I am embarrassed by the way the idea has been taken over by a bunch of crooks. Last edited by haroldeye; April 18th, 2016 at 09:00 AM.. |
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to haroldeye For This Useful Post: |
April 18th, 2016, 03:35 PM | #115 | |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,736
Thanks: 144
Thanked 14,338 Times in 1,702 Posts
|
Quote:
"n 1847 a motion was introduced in Parliament calling for the introduction of a decimal currency and the striking of coins of one-tenth and one-hundredth of a pound.[1] The motion was subsequently withdrawn on the understanding that a one-tenth pound coin would be produced to test public opinion. There was considerable discussion about what the coin should be called, with centum, decade, and dime being among the suggestions, before florin was eventually settled upon, partly because of its connection with old English coinage, and partly because other European countries also had coins of approximately the same size and weight called florins" |
|
April 18th, 2016, 06:23 PM | #116 | |
Former Staff
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 16,579
Thanks: 452,836
Thanked 222,657 Times in 16,567 Posts
|
Quote:
I can see the motives for blaming as much as possible on Europe at this time. But it actually had to do with your homegrown economy, and if you believe anything else, you're being suckered. Seriously |
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to palo5 For This Useful Post: |
April 18th, 2016, 11:54 PM | #117 | |
緑の男
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Jockistan, UK.
Posts: 8,316
Thanks: 39,016
Thanked 122,402 Times in 8,316 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to otokonomidori For This Useful Post: |
April 19th, 2016, 06:01 AM | #118 | |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,237
Thanks: 162,388
Thanked 278,408 Times in 26,182 Posts
|
Quote:
But what happens in this situation is the the country with the weak currency experiences high cost-push inflation as the price of imported finished goods and raw materials rises when expressed in the home currency. The goods more or less hold their price in relation to the strong currency and sky rocket in price for people buying in the weak currency. I am old enough to remember 1970s hyper-inflation, which peaked at well over 25% in the UK, and meanwhile Germany was having 5-7% annual inflation and thought this was way too high. Russian citizens will have seen this effect as well as the rouble rises and falls. Goods dont really get cheaper for foreigners except as a very short term adjustment/arbitrage difference. Sometimes they get to be unobtainable because exporting manufacturers wont export without knowing what price they can sell at without losing money. The Germans used to come to Britain regularly to go shopping, for years before Britain joined the EU; then after that not so much. This should tell us something.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
April 19th, 2016, 04:31 PM | #119 | |
Former Staff
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 16,579
Thanks: 452,836
Thanked 222,657 Times in 16,567 Posts
|
Quote:
The £ probably did have upward movement against the US$ from time to time. That must be the "period of strength" you remember, although actually it was weakness of the $. It the 80s in particular it went up and down like a yo-yo. We knew that US servicemen were paid in $$, and morale was lower when the $ was weak At any rate, it was about the currency, not Europe. There was a time when the £ had to stay within an exchange rate band against the DM, and that told speculators what the English would do if the £ fell against the DM. So they bet against it and won. But let's not fool ourselves -- you can't bet like that against a strong economy with a strong currency. If you do, you'll lose. It only works against weakness |
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to palo5 For This Useful Post: |
April 19th, 2016, 09:17 PM | #120 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Halfwitistan
Posts: 5,715
Thanks: 113,479
Thanked 59,962 Times in 5,707 Posts
|
I was a frequent visitor to Germany from 1974 to date, and my interest in the exchange rate was heightened by the fact that we were paid at the forces fixed rate (FFR) whilst there. FFR was not tourist rate and was usually better than the banks would give.
August 74 the rate was 6.2 and by the time of my next trip in 76 in was down to 4. It remained in the region of 4+ for several years and briefly went up over 5 in 81 (An excellent day in Hanover with much food and drink and errrmm!) After that there was a long slow decline until in the middle 90's I once got only 2.2 Dm for my pound. There was then something of a ralley and heading up to 2000 the rate went back to 3.3. I can remember driving home from one exercise with 6 cases of Veuve Cliquot in the car, at the equivalent of £10 a bottle when the UK supermarket price was £25. Our membership of the EU and particularily the ERM did have an effect on the currency. Once in the ERM we had to maintain the value of the £ and the currencies in the ERM had to be prepared to support us against speculator raids. When Soros mounted his raid HMG spent an awful lot of dosh maintaining the pounds value and asked the ERM states (mainly Germany and France) for help. The French and Germans didn't think ERM rules applied to them and the rest was history. When Soros mounted a raid against the Franc the Germans supported the French and the problem was greatly lessened, even though it cost a lot. Sensible Brits saw this happening and made the decision not to put anymore trust in the ERM, which is why we are not in the Euro. |
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to haroldeye For This Useful Post: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|