Brexit

[MarkJohnson]

Couldn't agree more - had to bite my tongue reading the post Rob quotes .. still biting it!

[eronald]

Rob,

 Maybe the politicians in Mallorca spend their time delivering building permits for houses and hotels, hiring doctors for their hospitals and teachers for theirs schools, investing in infrastructure, and shmoozing the local voters? That is what UK politicians stopped doing as the profits of the City of London banking system and the idol of perpetually rising house prices slowly became their only bellwethers.

The UK should be a business-school case study of how complacent politicians can ruin a democracy, just as China is a case study of how a totalitarian dictatorship can genuinely over the long term improve the lot of its citizens, out of the fear of losing its grip.

And by the way, we can add this as a note to the debate on globalisation: The US and UK are lobbying for global deregulation of the service industries so that the financial (Goldman&Co)  and big tech industries (Apple, Google & Co) can work unfettered everywhere, export their profits,  and never never be subject to local regulatory supervision or pay local taxes. China is lobbying for zero tariffs on physical manufactured products. The US and China haev agreed to swap one for the other.  In the end, globalisation is serving the 1% in the US and UK, and the 100% in China who actually make things - I would say that when it comes to trade, the Chinese self-appointed pols have their people's interest more at heart than the US elected representatives do.

Edmund


 

Well, Mallorca has thousands of foreigners living in it; never heard of a "Go home Foreigner" campaign, never ran into local animosity... the locals know perfectly well that through the work we create for them here they enjoy a prosperity the likes of which never existed before. Foreigners supply/supplied the difference between owning a car and the classy alternative of the burro cart. Ditto housing. That some foreigners try to run businesses is neither here nor there in the general scheme of things: they pass totally unnoticed. And on top of that, there is a genuine friendliness in the people, a willingness to help you out when you need it and ask, that has zero to do with personal gain or economics. It just is. And being old is not yet considered an infectious disease.

In Britain you need but go to a hospital or a hotel to realise that without the very people being pilloried, there would be no hospìtals or hotels still working.

And where you live: where would Paris be sans its tourists? The effects of terrorism have made measurable differences to prosperity already - except perhaps to your quoted 1%.

Movement and variety makes this world go around; Slobodan should know and be aware of that too...

;-)

Rob

[Rob C]

Rob,

 Maybe the politicians in Mallorca spend their time delivering building permits for houses and hotels, hiring doctors for their hospitals and teachers for theirs schools, investing in infrastructure, and shmoozing the local voters? That is what UK politicians stopped doing as the profits of the City of London baking system and the idol of perpetually rising house prices slowly became their only bellwethers.

The UK should be a business-school case study of how complacent politicians can ruin a democracy, just as China is a case study of how a totalitarian dictatorship can genuinely over the long term improve the lot of its citizens, out of the fear of losing its grip.

And by the way, we can add this as a note to the debate on globalisation: The US and UK are lobbying for global deregulation of the service industries so that the financial (Goldman&Co)  and big tech industries (Apple, Google & Co) can work unfettered everywhere, export their profits,  and never never be subject to local regulatory supervision or pay local taxes. China is lobbying for zero tariffs on physical manufactured products. The US and China haev agreed to swap one for the other.  In the end, globalisation is serving the 1% in the US and UK, and the 100% in China who actually make things - I would say that when it comes to trade, the Chinese self-appointed pols have their people's interest more at heart than the US elected representatives do.

Edmund

One advantage of age, if perhaps the only one:

this old guy has learned not to run at the flickering red cape, but, if he must, target the bullfighter instead.

;-)

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Rob, you can't be seriously comparing effects and attitudes of tourism with unchecked immigration!?

[Rob C]

Rob, you can't be seriously comparing effects and attitudes of tourism with unchecked immigration!?

I'm not comparing effect, I'm comparing attitudes to non-Spanish residents in Mallorca with some UK citizens' attitudes to non-Brits in the UK. (If you want to talk tourism, I'm more skeptical about it than any Spaniard I have ever met.)

Tourism, however, is apparently the biggest single industry in the world. So, you could surmise that not only have the Brexiteers signalled their distaste for anything non-Brit, but also for that magical industry that fills hotels and airline seats the world over. But it's not really anything new: even during WW2, when Britain hosted many US servicemen about to lose their lives protecting British and European ones, there was the well-known complaint joke about US soldiers being "over-paid, over-sexed and over here," which shows you that within the UK, fear and distrust is nothing new, in fact it's a national characteristic. Why else do you imagine that large parts of the Welsh, the Irish and the Scots proletariat have this acute dislike for the English? Partly it's the inferiority complex some within those societies share, but also very much because of the perceived arrogance that many English people display - but they also do that to one another... especially the south towards the north, and thus vice versa.

Unchecked immigration's a red herring: Britain hadn't signed up to that, ever. Free movement within European countries does not mean free movement of the world's dispossessed, it means of Europeans. The current migration crisis is another matter, one that should be handled within the zones that cause it. Facing (not) up to that reality is just another fudge that has been made by the world's powers. AKAIK nobody is trying to migrate to Russia or to China; not even France seems to be good enough for some, hence The Jungle which will obviously reappear any time soon. France apparently already has a far bigger Muslim population than the UK, where one would have thought these migrants would have felt more at ease than in Britain, but isn't it curious that the attraction is not for France, but for Britain, and by Britain, let's be specific: London?

What's at play here is a helluva lot more than people displaced by civil war.

Rob

[eronald]

I don't understand why the "Jungle" people refuse to stay in France. Maybe someone here has the story on that.

On the other had, the "liberation" of the Sunni city Mosul by our new Shiite and Kurd friends means a million people will have the choice of die or leave - and as Syria is now in disarray and the US has decided that the price of oil and the absence of Isis is the disappearance of  Sunnis in Iraq, most of them will turn up in waves here in Europe.

Edmund

I'm not comparing effect, I'm comparing attitudes to non-Spanish residents in Mallorca with some UK citizens' attitudes to non-Brits in the UK. (If you want to talk tourism, I'm more skeptical about it than any Spaniard I have ever met.)

Tourism, however, is apparently the biggest single industry in the world. So, you could surmise that not only have the Brexiteers signalled their distaste for anything non-Brit, but also for that magical industry that fills hotels and airline seats the world over. But it's not really anything new: even during WW2, when Britain hosted many US servicemen about to lose their lives protecting British and European ones, there was the well-known complaint joke about US soldiers being "over-paid, over-sexed and over here," which shows you that within the UK, fear and distrust is nothing new, in fact it's a national characteristic. Why else do you imagine that large parts of the Welsh, the Irish and the Scots proletariat have this acute dislike for the English? Partly it's the inferiority complex some within those societies share, but also very much because of the perceived arrogance that many English people display - but they also do that to one another... especially the south towards the north, and thus vice versa.

Unchecked immigration's a red herring: Britain hadn't signed up to that, ever. Free movement within European countries does not mean free movement of the world's dispossessed, it means of Europeans. The current migration crisis is another matter, one that should be handled within the zones that cause it. Facing (not) up to that reality is just another fudge that has been made by the world's powers. AKAIK nobody is trying to migrate to Russia or to China; not even France seems to be good enough for some, hence The Jungle which will obviously reappear any time soon. France apparently already has a far bigger Muslim population than the UK, where one would have thought these migrants would have felt more at ease than in Britain, but isn't it curious that the attraction is not for France, but for Britain, and by Britain, let's be specific: London?

What's at play here is a helluva lot more than people displaced by civil war.

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...by Britain, let's be specific: London?

Rob,

And why not? There they have a Muslim mayor, whose first order of business was to ban bikinis 

[Alan Klein]

As an American looking from afar, it seems that the EU is in trouble exactly because it decided to use the advantages of a free trade zone to push for political integration among different sovereign countries that have their own cultures, languages and identities.  The Brits are just the first that revolted to this idea; more will follow.   Even considering that America is the land of immigrants, you see similar attitudes here as well.  So one can understand the misgivings of European countries that have had  more homogenous histories.

[Rob C]

Rob,

And why not? There they have a Muslim mayor, whose first order of business was to ban bikinis 

Indeed, but only on the subway...

;-)

Rob

[Rob C]

As an American looking from afar, it seems that the EU is in trouble exactly because it decided to use the advantages of a free trade zone to push for political integration among different sovereign countries that have their own cultures, languages and identities.  The Brits are just the first that revolted to this idea; more will follow.   Even considering that America is the land of immigrants, you see similar attitudes here as well.  So one can understand the misgivings of European countries that have had  more homogenous histories.

Alan, there's no doubt that federalism isn't to everybody's taste. It was never part of any deal that Mrs T would have countenanced - she'd have read the riot act and that would have been that. I like strong ladies; they get stuff done. Or not done, which can be better. We have not had a strong leader since, only fakes and frauds and players to the factions. She knew and understood the wider picture, and even the Russians respected that.

Germany gets blamed by some, not sure why, but remember that many Germans regret the loss of their powerful currency, exchanged for the tracing paper stuff they now 'enjoy'. You're absolutely right: and though the creeping 'ism has helped some in the way of handouts, I believe that it has distanced even more. But that could, and probably would have been fixed from within, had the UK remained. I sort of suspect that the united, non-latin countries would have pulled the plug on that when push came to shove. The south needs all the help it can get, and it always did after the Middle Ages... are we approching the new Dark ones?

So why, then, do I still think we should have remained? Apart from the obvious personal ones of location, there's the belief that we are better off united to some degree, at least on good speaking and trading terms, which pissing on the neghbours hardly encourages. And the bigger we are, the better we can deal with the exercising red bears.

Rob

[Alan Klein]

Rob, the EU succeeds as a common market because it greases the economic skids.  So I agree with you that if they stopped there, everyone would be applauding.  It's when they got into accommodating immigration and rule making from the gremlins in EU headquarters which ignore the social norms of each country's DNA that causes the problems and revolt.  If the EU was to pull back to just a trade group, it might be saved.  Otherwise the bickering will continue and imbalances among the differing countries  will cause a complete disintegration.  Europe is just not one country, never was, never will be.  The "one world"; "One Europe" believers just don't get it.

[myotis]

Rob,

And why not? There they have a Muslim mayor, whose first order of business was to ban bikinis 

I know you have a smilie, but for the benefit of others, he actually banned "body shaming" adverts that were selling weight loss products, and that was in response the advertising watchdog raising the issue.

He was quoted as saying

"As the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end"


For me, I don't think it should have been banned, and maybe his religion did indeed encourage him to support the concerns about this kind of advertising - who knows, but I still think it is mis-representing the situation, by suggesting his first order of the day was to ban bikinis because he was a muslim. Unless you know the background, and take on board the smilie.

Cheers,

Graham

[Rob C]

Mayorialm decision based on religion or not, it ain't nuttin' new:

Sopie Dahl's Opìum ad was also banned, kicked around and generally turned into a circus (but good for sales, nonetheless); however, regarding said mayorial decision: imagine the almighty row if it had been the Pope who had intervened... all interventions are not equal. London is lost already, which explains The Jungle to anyone in doubt.

Rob C

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

London is lost already, which explains The Jungle to anyone in doubt.

Hi Rob,

If that were the case, then the US Pentagon seems to agree.

Cheers,
Bart

[myotis]

Mayorialm decision based on religion or not, it ain't nuttin' new:

Rob C

It's also difficult to separate someone's religion from "who they are", and its "who they are" that got them elected. That doesn't just apply to religion of course, it also applies to whether you went Eton, were brought up in a council estate, or whatever.

You of course still expect fairness and objectivity in the decisions being made, but to expect politicians (or any of us) to make decisions that ignore who they are, is expecting too much.

That is why we vote for politicians who are the "most like us", which may also explain why I have never had anyone I have voted for, actually elected !!

Cheers,
Graham



 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Australia is often touted in these forums as a model of doing the right thing. Perhaps they are indeed onto something here:

Australia to ban all asylum seekers arriving by boat from ever visiting

https://news.google.com/news/ampviewer?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2Famp%2Fnews%2Faustralia-to-ban-all-asylum-seekers-arriving-by-boat-from-ever-visiting%2F#i-F8766701-4EEB-4FB5-A233-5F3ADE5F1DC3

Now, with the U.K. out of EU and, presumably, closer to Australia...

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...he actually banned "body shaming"...

Of course.

Which mayor, of which city in the world, doesn't dream of tackling such important urban issues like "body shaming" as his/her first order of business?

Oh, by the way, if a nicely built, normal, i.e., not too fat, not too skinny, swimsuit model is considered "body shaming"... God help us all and save us from this leftie idiocy.

[Rob C]

Of course.

Which mayor, of which city in the world, doesn't dream of tackling such important urban issues like "body shaming" as his/her first order of business?

Oh, by the way, if a nicely built, normal, i.e., not too fat, not too skinny, swimsuit model is considered "body shaming"... God help us all and save us from this leftie idiocy.

Some healthy doses of "body-shaming" is exactly what huge swathes of the population need! As is well documented, there were precious few fat people in the concentration camps. Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that too much food is why people get obese. Too much food as in junk, grazing, sweet bubbly drinks and all the other crap with which folks delight in filling themselves.

I'm sure there are genuine medical conditions that cause some folks to grow fat, but pretending that that get-out applies to all is patently bullshit. If not, then the sooner the species dies out, the better. Maybe that's what this is actually about... Nature doing its thing again.

It's all about self-control, self-respect and facing up to reality, but that's a terribly difficult one too, it seems. And no, I'm not thinking of any gender in isolation: both all genders inflict grossness upon themselves. Why, for heaven's sake, it's your own life you threaten.

Rob

[myotis]

Of course.

Which mayor, of which city in the world, doesn't dream of tackling such important urban issues like "body shaming" as his/her first order of business?

Oh, by the way, if a nicely built, normal, i.e., not too fat, not too skinny, swimsuit model is considered "body shaming"... God help us all and save us from this leftie idiocy.

How do you know this was the first thing he did after taking office on the 9th May?

And, there was no suggestion that the body being shown was "shameful", the argument was that it made women without a body that looked like like this, ashamed of the body they had, and therefore "shamed" into buying the weight loss product.

The validity of this argument is for a different forum, but it still seems a long way from "muslim mayors banning bikinis", which totally misrepresented the story, even if it was an amusing line.

Cheers,

Graham

[myotis]

Some healthy doses of "body-shaming" is exactly what huge swathes of the population need!

Rob

That may well be true, but I'm not sure how well it works, with the exceptions of those who have some genuine issues, I think you need to look at why people over eat. If its linked with low esteem and depression, a bit of body shaming is more likely to make them eat more.

Cheers,

Graham