Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Answer Dil Fred ,he makes a good point ,although it may not be what you wanted to hear.

Inconvenient facts are very inconvenient George.

You're not wrong there MaxK

25I7,

At the time that labour introduced fees and reduced "support grants" that it was wrong to do so. I had exposure to the changes in the University, Technical Colleges, system and again thought it wrong in general, but understood the non-fictitious and fictitious reasons for doing so.

The increase in the numbers of students was seen by many as an attempt to camouflage unemployment figures, just as zero hour contracts are being used.

Again I thought a small payment to fees etc. may bring a sense of reality to many students and parents.

However, I also think "education" should be paid for by the tax system and in a way it is. The ones who benefit the most from their qualification by later "earnings" can afford higher return what paid for the success, while those who settled further down the income chain, in nursing, teaching (Some in both have PhD and good honour degrees.) would pay less back in tax.

Others whether educated practically or theoretically give back to society in other ways by lubricating it.

As far a valuing the returns that various "courses" or "training" give to society immediate or long term it is often open to individual taste.

I was told by a very successful businessman as a friend, who had what many would think was a disastrous university career, that the qualifications he had been from "mixing" with others, the period to challenge and mature and the "debating society"

It stood him in better than his degree.


~_~_~_~_

Dil,

Much of what you describe was due to lousy and incompetent management, poor union leadership, lousy and incompetent dishonesty of government's aims or goals.

And little to do with rules, negotiations, laws of the EU ect..

It appears you are looking for scapegoats.

Don't only look at the problem.

Look at the precursors of the problems

====

It was the stupidity of little Englanders, Welshmen or Bordermen.


Many businesses had good working relationships.

-=-=-=-=

At the moment, I am in the South of France, where many are bemused by the "Brexit" actions of Little Englanders, but also dismiss the action of little passing importance.

Errr Fred , the erm crisis was entirely due to us being in the EU.

I'm not suggesting the other things were caused by us being in the EU just pointing out that there will be lows whether we stay in or leave.

At the moment, I am in the South of France, where many are bemused by the "Brexit" actions of Little Englanders, but also dismiss the action of little passing importance.
----------------

Why don't you stay there Fred you hate Great Britain .

Dumbo.

I don't feel as bitter or twisted as you seem to be, but to avoid you I think I would consider living in the France and enjoy the present heat.

Also, I don't meet many here who detest the little englanders, as much as you seem to dislike your fellow man, just feel sorrow and pity for some of them who seem to have your outdated views.

-=-=-=-=

Dil,

Refreshed my memory from Wiki and it suggests incompetence of the previous and tory government in the occupation of No 10 Downing Street.

Black Wednesday
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Black Wednesday (disambiguation).

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Part of a series of articles on the
United Kingdom
in the
European Union
UK location in the EU 2016.svg
Accession [show]
Membership [show]
Withdrawal [show]
v t e
In politics and economics, Black Wednesday refers to 16 September 1992, when the British Conservative government was forced to withdraw the pound sterling from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) after it was unable to keep the pound above its agreed lower limit in the ERM. In 1997, the UK Treasury estimated the cost of Black Wednesday at £3.4 billion.[1] In 2005, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the actual cost may have been slightly less, £3.3 billion.[2] Until the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union in June 2016 it was the most significant event[according to whom?] to happen during its time as a member of the European Communities (EC)/European Union (EU) and was made even more embarrassing as the United Kingdom was holding the Presidency of the European Communities at the same time.
The trading losses in August and September were estimated at £800 million, but the main loss to taxpayers arose because devaluation could have made them a profit. The papers [clarification needed] show that if the government had maintained $24 billion foreign currency reserves and the pound had fallen by the same amount, the UK would have made a £2.4 billion profit on the pound sterling's devaluation.[3][need quotation to verify]

When the ERM was set up in 1979, the United Kingdom declined to join. This was a controversial decision, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Geoffrey Howe, was staunchly pro-European. His successor, Nigel Lawson, a believer in a fixed exchange rate, admired the low inflationary record of West Germany. He attributed it to the strength of the Deutsche Mark and the management of the Bundesbank. Thus, although the UK had not joined the ERM, from early 1987 to March 1988 the Treasury followed a semi-official policy of 'shadowing' the Deutsche Mark.[4] Matters came to a head in a clash between Lawson and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's economic adviser Alan Walters, when Walters claimed that the Exchange Rate Mechanism was "half baked".[citation needed]
This led to Lawson's resignation as chancellor to be replaced by his old protégé John Major, who, with Douglas Hurd, the then Foreign Secretary, convinced the Cabinet to sign Britain up to the ERM in October 1990, effectively guaranteeing that the British government would follow an economic and monetary policy preventing the exchange rate between the pound and other member currencies from fluctuating by more than 6%. On 8 October 1990, Thatcher entered the pound into the ERM mechanism at DM 2.95 to the pound. Hence, if the exchange rate ever neared the bottom of its permitted range, DM 2.773, the government would be obliged to intervene. With UK inflation at three times the rate of Germany's, interest rates at 15% and the "Lawson Boom" about to bust, the conditions for joining the ERM were not favourable at that time.[citation needed]
From the beginning of the 1990s, high German interest rates, set by the Bundesbank to counteract inflationary effects related to excess expenditure on German reunification, caused significant stress across the whole of the ERM. The UK and Italy had additional difficulties with their double deficits, while the UK was also hurt by the rapid depreciation of the United States Dollar – a currency in which many British exports were priced – that summer. Issues of national prestige and the commitment to a doctrine that the fixing of exchange rates within the ERM was a pathway to a single European currency inhibited the adjustment of exchange rates. In the wake of the rejection of the Maastricht Treaty by the Danish electorate in a referendum in the spring of 1992, and announcement that there would be a referendum in France as well, those ERM currencies that were trading close to the bottom of their ERM bands came under pressure from foreign exchange traders.[citation needed]
In the months leading up to Black Wednesday, George Soros had been building a huge short position in pounds sterling that would become immensely profitable if the pound fell below the lower band of the ERM. Soros recognized the unfavourable position at which the United Kingdom joined the ERM, believing the rate at which the UK was brought into the Exchange Rate Mechanism was too high, their inflation was also much too high (triple the German rate), and British interest rates were hurting their asset prices.[5] Soros made over £1 billion[6] in profit by short selling sterling.

-=-=-=-=

But I am prepared to be enlightened.

Labour Goverment? Not had one of those since immediately after the war so anyone on here blaming them want their bumps felt 😆

German invation alert!..sooner we get out of Europe the better I say 😀

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40838478
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40838478

Fred go take a better look at what happened and what the Germans , French and the rest of the EU were supposed to do but didn't when the currency of a member of the erm was near the floor of its permitted range.

Another case of do as we say but we'll do what we want by Germany and the EU.

So happy to be leaving , have a nice holiday Fred and tell the locals more of us wanted out than in and that's why we're leaving.

This may at first glance appear to be nothing more than a social media prank, but it's actually the truth about what the French feel about the tourists who come each summer. It's not aimed specifically at the Brits - They feel the same about German, Dutch, Belgian tourists too.

Unamused French mayor reassures tourists after they're told to 'Go f***ing home'

At the moment, I am in the South of France, where many are bemused by the "Brexit" actions of Little Englanders, but also dismiss the action of little passing importance.

At the moment, so am I, and 33.9% of the natives around these parts voted for Marine le Pen in the second round run off of the presidential election so they could exit the EU themselves. The 66.1% who voted for Macron and En Marche (on the move, change, forwards), ignored the political establishment and voted for change because they were disillusioned at the lack of employment opportunity in France métropolitaine amongst other things.

In fact, the local who I spent yesterday afternoon talking to in the sea as we tried to keep cool, was praising the actions of the Brits for leaving the EU.

Hils , that banner probably reflects the feeling of many locals in many tourist areas not just in France but in the UK too.

That was certainly the case where I grew up on Barry Island and imo was justified even though personally as a kid I loved the summer and the influx of hundreds of teenage girls each week :-)

Have you got a 'Mae twristiaid yn mynd adref ffycin' banner, Dilbert?

:o)

But yes Dil, you're right. The same thing applies over the border in Spain, where Catalan and Basque groups are targeting tourists.

From the BBC

It's understandable to a degree. The population in my little town swells three or four fold during July and August. You can't park in the town, and the shops are full. The permanent residents know that the local economy needs tourism, and they're discreet about who they complain to and what they say, but the underlying sentiment is still there.

Hilary/Dil

On the same subject

From the Guardian

7250. If its not specifically aimed at the Brits, why is it in english? Why not " bugger off Bosch and find your own deck chairs?"

From what I understand, he had several banners in different languages. He flew two banners, and the police were waiting for him back at the airstrip before he could fly the others.

7255. The scribbler for the Guardian can't even spell Janeiro. For years I drove daily through Ipanema and never saw drunken tourists. Even on New Year's Eve in Copacabana. Alcohol is not served on the beach and in any case the chopp is so weak that you are more likely to drown in it than become drunk. Find one lie and there are probably others there to spice up the article.
On the general theme of visitors annoying locals, of course it goes on. Ask the folk of Cornwall or anyone living within 25 miles of Heathrow where, unfortunately, the visitors don't return home.